Ma v R [2010] NSWCCA 320

Ma v R [2010] NSWCCA 320

No error was established in the assessment of the discount for the applicant’s assistance; the sentencing judge’s distinction in discounts as between the applicant and her co-offender was open on the evidence regarding their roles and assistance. The sentence was not manifestly excessive, having regard to all objective and subjective factors, including the applicant’s role, the extraordinary quantity and value of the drugs, and the statutory maxima.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'assistance to Authorities' 'manifest Excess' 'sentencing Discounts']

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 / Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence and Appeal

  1. 1 ['Whether the discount given for assistance was too low compared to discount for co-offender' 'Whether there was error in assessment of discount for assistance' 'Whether the sentence is manifestly excessive']

Ratio Decidendi

No error was established in the assessment of the discount for the applicant’s assistance; the sentencing judge’s distinction in discounts as between the applicant and her co-offender was open on the evidence regarding their roles and assistance. The sentence was not manifestly excessive, having regard to all objective and subjective factors, including the applicant’s role, the extraordinary quantity and value of the drugs, and the statutory maxima.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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