YS v R [2010] NSWCCA 98

YS v R [2010] NSWCCA 98

The sentence disclosed no identifiable or manifest error. The sentencing judge took into account the applicant's youth, mental illness and totality, correctly dealt with the matter according to law, and the offence was a most serious offence within the worst category of offences. A head sentence of 8 years with a 5 year non-parole period, cumulative on the earlier sentence but backdated to when imprisonment related solely to this offence, was not manifestly excessive and did not produce an inappropriate total sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Break and Enter Commit Serious Indictable Offence' 'sexual Assault' 'young Offender' 'mental Illness' 'totality' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['aggravated Break and Enter Commit Serious Indictable Offence' 'sexual Assault' 'young Offender' 'mental Illness' 'totality' 'manifest Excess']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because it failed properly to reflect the applicant's youth at the time of the offence, mental illness and totality." "Whether the sentencing judge gave appropriate weight to the applicant's mental or psychiatric issues and youth in assessing general deterrence, personal deterrence and rehabilitation." "Whether the wholly cumulative sentence produced an inappropriate total sentence for the applicant's overall criminality."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence disclosed no identifiable or manifest error. The sentencing judge took into account the applicant's youth, mental illness and totality, correctly dealt with the matter according to law, and the offence was a most serious offence within the worst category of offences. A head sentence of 8 years with a 5 year non-parole period, cumulative on the earlier sentence but backdated to when imprisonment related solely to this offence, was not manifestly excessive and did not produce an inappropriate total sentence.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal be granted.' 'Appeal be dismissed.']