Phanekham v R [2015] NSWCCA 295

Phanekham v R [2015] NSWCCA 295

The sentencing judge did not err in failing to have regard to the applicant's mental health when considering general and specific deterrence, as in the particular circumstances of this case, general and specific deterrence remained significant. No injustice arose from the failure of earlier counsel to raise these matters.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'mental Health' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'mental Health' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'special Circumstances']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to have proper regard to the applicant's mental health in a principled fashion" "Whether injustice arose from the failure of counsel at first instance to make submissions regarding the applicant's mental state"]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in failing to have regard to the applicant's mental health when considering general and specific deterrence, as in the particular circumstances of this case, general and specific deterrence remained significant. No injustice arose from the failure of earlier counsel to raise these matters.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']