› Whether appellate court's jurisdiction limited to correction of error
› Whether civil appellate standard of review (Warren v Coombes; Fox v Percy) applicable to criminal sentence appeals
› Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 6(3)
Appeal
› Criminal appeal
› Appeal against sentence
› Review of findings of fact
› Whether finding of intent to torture open on the evidence
› Whether frenzied attack incompatible with intent to torture
Criminal Law
› Sentencing
› Discount for guilty plea
› Whether discount may be refused where protection of public requires
› Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 53A
Criminal Law
› Sentencing
› Parity
› Whether legitimate sense of grievance
› Co-offender charged with additional offences
› Juvenile offender sentenced identically to adult co-offender
› Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 6
Quick Take
1The civil appellate standard of review from Warren v Coombes and Fox v Percy (applicable to appeals by way of rehearing under s 75A of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)) cannot be extrapolated to criminal sentence appeals under ss 5 and 6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), which require demonstrated error before the appellate court will intervene.
2A sentencing judge's finding of intent to torture, drawn by inference from agreed facts including the number and distribution of stab wounds, is a finding of fact that the CCA will not disturb absent demonstrated error; and even if such a finding were not open, a characterisation of the attack as 'frenzied' yields the same assessment of objective seriousness.
Case Details
Citation[2014] NSWCCA 339
CourtNSWCCA
JurisdictionNew South Wales
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 34 later cases that cite this judgment.
20 of the 34 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.
