Tapai v Regina

[2009] NSWCCA 246

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Relevant factors
4. › Parity between co-offenders
5. › Whether sentencing judge may consider sentencing reasons for co-offender
6. › Whether appropriate to consider whether co-offender's sentence manifestly excessive or inadequate
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Sentencing procedure
4. › Factual basis for sentence
5. › Role of guilty plea
6. › Discount for utilitarian value
7. › Whether remorse and contrition encompassed by plea discount
8. › Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 21A
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Non-parole period
4. › Standard non-parole period
5. › Aggravating or mitigating factors
6. › Whether absence of aggravating factors present in other cases detracts from significance of other elements of aggravation
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Sentencing procedure
4. › Sentencing statistics
5. › Whether statistics of limited use when based on limited data

Quick Take

When considering parity between co-offenders, a sentencing court may consider the sentencing reasons for the co-offender but should not assess whether the co-offender's sentence was manifestly excessive or inadequate. Since the introduction of s 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, the practice is to quantify only the utilitarian value of a guilty plea, with remorse and contrition encompassed within the plea discount rather than separately quantified. Sentencing statistics based on a small number of cases are of very little assistance in individual sentencing.