Regina v Newham [2005] NSWCCA 325

Regina v Newham [2005] NSWCCA 325

The sentencing judge erred in applying aggravating factors as separate considerations when those matters either formed part of the charged offence or were elements of more serious offences not charged. These errors justify the appellate court in intervening and resentencing the applicant.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Wade Robert Newham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Severity of Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; appellant resentenced
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Aggravating Factors, Resentencing, Crimes Act 1900 S 61 L, Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 S 21 a
Criminal Law Sentencing Aggravating Factors Resentencing Crimes Act 1900 S 61 L Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 S 21 a

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 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Wade Robert Newham

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Severity of Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by taking into account aggravating factors which were ingredients of the offence or elements of a more serious charge not laid
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's sentence was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in applying aggravating factors as separate considerations when those matters either formed part of the charged offence or were elements of more serious offences not charged. These errors justify the appellate court in intervening and resentencing the applicant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; appellant resentenced

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal against severity of sentence is granted.
  • Appeal allowed.