Sadiq v R

[2023] NSWCCA 25

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. › Parity
4. › Whether consideration of parity confined to events occurring within timeframe specified on indictment
5. › Whether sentencing judge entitled to have regard to facts outside indictment dates when comparing co-offenders
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Assessment of objective criminality
4. › Manufacture of prohibited drugs
5. › Large commercial quantity
6. › Whether mid-range assessment open on the facts
7. › Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 24(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Manifest excess
5. › Whether sentence unreasonable or plainly unjust such that error may be inferred
6. › Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)

Quick Take

When assessing parity between co-offenders, a sentencing court is not confined to facts occurring within the timeframe specified on the indictment. The operation of the parity principle is inevitably broader than the time during which the offence is alleged to have occurred, and extends to the broader factual background including the charges brought and findings made in each case. Sentences imposed in comparable cases do not mark the outer bounds of permissible sentencing discretion.

Case Details

Citation[2023] NSWCCA 25

CourtNSWCCA

JurisdictionNew South Wales

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.

Cited by1

2023Ritchie v RNSWCCA 153

Relies on17

2022Qin v RNSWCCA 137
2021R v Nguyen and TranNSWDC 576
2021Tsimingos v RNSWCCA 107
2019El Kheir v RNSWCCA 288
and 13 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in