R v Cram

[2002] NSWCCA 83

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm
4. › Guideline judgment
5. › Application of R v Jurisic
6. › Aggravating factors
7. › Driving against traffic to evade police
8. › Extensive prior record
9. › Whether sentence manifestly excessive
10. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 52A(3)(c)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Discount for plea of guilty
4. › Utilitarian value
5. › Whether strength of Crown case relevant to discount
6. › R v Thomson & Houlton
7. › R v Cameron [2002] HCA 6
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Sentence appeal
4. › Proviso
5. › Whether less severe sentence warranted in law notwithstanding error
6. › Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(3)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Cumulative sentences
4. › Effect of cumulative sentence on overall non-parole period
5. › Special circumstances
6. › Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 44(2)

Quick Take

The strength of the Crown case is not a relevant consideration in assessing the discount for the utilitarian value of a guilty plea, as established in R v Thomson & Houlton. However, such an error will not lead to resentencing where no less severe sentence is warranted in law. Where an error in cumulative sentence commencement dates benefits the offender, the Court will not intervene to correct the anomaly.