Court of Criminal Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Brown v R [2023] NSWCCA 330 Hearing dates: 22 November 2023 Date of orders: 20 December 2023 Decision date: 20 December 2023 Before: Leeming JA at [1];
Garling J at [2];
Cavanagh J at [3]Decision: 1. Leave to appeal granted.
2. Appeal allowed.
3. The decision of Judge G O’Rourke SC of 16 March 2023 is quashed.
4. The applicant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years and 3 months commencing on 10 February 2022 and expiring on 9 May 2025 with a non-parole period of 2 years. The non-parole period will expire on 9 February 2024.
Catchwords: CRIMES – Appeal against sentence – whether sentencing judge erred in assessment of objective seriousness
CRIMES – Appeal against sentence – whether sentencing judge erred in assessment of the applicant’s rehabilitative prospects
CRIMES – Appeal against sentence – where offending was assessed to be within the mid-range – where offences occurred within a short period in a single course of conduct – where applicant had strong subjective case – consideration of sentences imposed in cases with similar fact patterns – sentence is manifestly excessive – applicant resentenced
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 66C(3), 61M(2)
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW) s 13(1)
Cases Cited: Alarcon v The Queen [2018] NSWCCA 298
Azzopardi v R [2019] NSWCCA 306
Beavis v The Queen [2018] NSWCCA 248
Blackett v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA 210
Dinsdale v R (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54
DS v R; DM v R (2022) 109 NSWLR 82; [2022] NSWCCA 156
Hili v R; Jones v R (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
Kenny v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 6
Markarian v R (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Muniandy v R [2021] NSWCCA 305
O’Brien v The Queen [2013] NSWCCA 197
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Michael George Brown (Applicant)
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
M Higgins (Applicant)
J Styles (Respondent)
Nikola Velcic & Associates (Applicant)
NSW Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/00039711 Publication restriction: None Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- District Court of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction:
- Criminal
- Date of Decision:
- 16 March 2023
- Before:
- Judge G O’Rourke SC
- File Number(s):
- 2022/00039711
HEADNOTE
[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]
The applicant pleaded guilty to two offences of sexual intercourse with a child between the ages of 14 and 16 contrary to s 66C(3) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). On…
Continue reading Brown v The King
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Brown v The King [2023] NSWCCA 330
- Case
- [2023] NSWCCA 330
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around whether the sentencing judge had made errors in evaluating the objective seriousness of the crimes and the applicant's rehabilitative prospects. The applicant contended that the sentencing judge had overlooked significant mitigating factors and that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive when compared to sentences in similar cases. The court was required to determine whether the sentence was appropriate and whether any errors in the assessment of the relevant factors warranted a reduction in the sentence.
In its decision, the court examined the sentencing judge's assessment of the objective seriousness of the crimes and the applicant's rehabilitative prospects. The court found that the sentencing judge had erred in the assessment of the objective seriousness and that the applicant's rehabilitative prospects were stronger than originally considered. The court noted that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive when compared to sentences in similar cases. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, quashed the original sentence, and resentenced the applicant. The new sentence reflected the court's assessment of the appropriate punishment for the crimes committed, taking into account all relevant factors.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.