REGINA v MAESSEN [2004] NSWCCA 160
The sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly excessive, in part due to an insufficient application of the utilitarian discount and failure to separately consider the seriousness of each offence; sentences should reflect individual criminality and circumstances, consistent with appellate authority.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 March 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; sentences quashed; substituted sentences imposed
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'utilitarian Discount' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in applying the utilitarian discount' 'Proper approach to sentencing for multiple offences']
Ratio Decidendi
The sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly excessive, in part due to an insufficient application of the utilitarian discount and failure to separately consider the seriousness of each offence; sentences should reflect individual criminality and circumstances, consistent with appellate authority.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; sentences quashed; substituted sentences imposed
Orders
- ['In respect of the second charge: term of imprisonment of eighteen months commencing 11 February 2003 and ending on 10 August 2004 with a non-parole period expiring 15 March 2004; applicant released today and supervised by Probation and Parole Service during parole' 'In respect of the first charge: fixed term of...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment