Cavuoto v Reis [2017] ACTSC 235 — Appeal-general Principles — Barrister AI
← Back
Cavuoto v Reis
[2017] ACTSC 235
Supreme Court of the ACT
10 August 2017
Good law / bad law (Silk subscription)
Add to Notebook
0 highlights
0 notes
Copy Citation
More
Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.
See how it works
Interrogate
Catchwords
Appeal and New Trial
›
APPEAL-GENERAL PRINCIPLES
›
Interference with Discretion of Court Below
›
appeal from Magistrates Court
›
appeal allowed
›
Magistrate confused about sentencing options available to him
›
Magistrate misconstrued comments in R v Hampson to find that custodial sentence was required
›
correct reading of R v Hampson is that custodial sentence is not excluded.
Criminal Law
›
JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
›
Judgment and Punishment
›
Sentence
›
sentencing discretion re-exercised
›
appellant’s actions caused serious distress and fear to the victim
›
appellant’s previous good character entitles him to some leniency
›
no sentence other than imprisonment appropriate but no need for immediate full time custody.
Case Details
Citation
[2017] ACTSC 235
Court
ACTSC
Jurisdiction
Australian Capital Territory
Decision Date
10 August 2017
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members.
[2017] ACTSC 235
2 authorities it relies on
1988
1994
2000
2006
2012
2017
Relies on
2
2011
R v Hampson
QCA 132
and 1 more after sign-in
Create free account
Already have an account?
Sign in
See how it works
