Legal Research
Cases
Chartres-Abbott v R

Chartres-Abbott v R

Case [2021] NSWCCA 239 6 October 2021

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Chartres-Abbott v R [2021] NSWCCA 239
Hearing dates: 20 August 2021
Date of orders: 6 October 2021
Decision date: 06 October 2021
Before: Brereton JA at [1];
Campbell J at [47];
Hamill J at [48]
Decision:
(1) Grant leave to the applicant to appeal against the aggregate sentence imposed on 28 August 2020 by the District Court;
(2) Allow the appeal; and
(3) Quash the aggregate sentence imposed in the District Court on 28 August 2020, and in lieu thereof:
(a) Impose an aggregate sentence of ten years’ imprisonment to commence from 25 May 2019 and expire on 24 May 2029;
(b) Pursuant to s 44(2A) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), set a non-parole period of six years, and specify that the earliest date the applicant will be eligible to be released on parole is 25 May 2025; and
(c) Pursuant to s 53A(2)(b) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), record that an aggregate sentence is imposed and indicate to the applicant that the sentences that would have been imposed for each offence under separate sentences instead of an aggregate sentence are as follows:
(i) Sequence 1 (Supply 888.79 grams of methylamphetamine): a non-parole period of four years and six months and additional term of three years, for a total of seven years and six months;
(ii) Sequence 2 (Supply 368.8 grams of heroin): a non-parole period of two years and three months and additional term of one year and six months, for a total of three years and nine months;
(iii) Sequence 6 (Supply 372.63 grams of methylamphetamine): a non-parole period of two years and nine months and additional term of one year and nine months, for a total of four years and six months;
(iv) Sequence 3 (Possess shortened Sportco .22 rifle with magazine without authority): a term of imprisonment of three years and four months; and
(v) Sequence 19 (Possess shortened Sterling .22 firearm without authority): a term of imprisonment of two years and seven months.

Catchwords:
CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against sentence – Manifest excess – Drug offences – Supply prohibited drug – One count of large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine and two counts of commercial quantities of heroin and methylamphetamine – Firearms offences – Two counts of possess shortened firearm – Aggregate sentence of fourteen years, eight years six months non-parole – Use of discounts to indicative sentences to determine aggregate sentence but for discounts – Use of comparable cases indicating substantially shorter sentences in like cases and in cases involving considerably greater quantities of methylamphetamine – Manifest excess established
CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against sentence – Re-sentence – Special circumstances and reduced moral culpability – More substantial degree of concurrency – Aggregate sentence of ten years, six years non-parole, imposed

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 193C(2)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 44(2A), 53A(2)(b)
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Chartres-Abbott v R

Details

AGLC: Chartres-Abbott v R [2021] NSWCCA 239
Case: [2021] NSWCCA 239
Decision Date: 06 October 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Chartres-Abbott v R, the appellant was convicted of various drug and firearms offences and was sentenced to an aggregate term of fourteen years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of eight years and six months. The central issue in this appeal was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, particularly in light of the substantial discounts applied to the indicative sentences for each offence. The appellant argued that the aggregate sentence, even after the discounts, was still significantly higher than sentences imposed in similar cases, especially those involving larger quantities of methylamphetamine.

The court was required to determine whether the sentence was manifestly excessive by assessing the aggregate sentence but for the discounts and comparing it with sentences imposed in comparable cases. The appellant relied on cases where defendants, in similar circumstances, received substantially shorter sentences despite possessing considerably larger quantities of methylamphetamine. The court also considered the special circumstances and reduced moral culpability of the appellant, as well as the degree of concurrency in the offences.

The court found that the aggregate sentence but for the discounts was indeed manifestly excessive, given the comparable cases where defendants received much shorter sentences for similar and more severe offences. The court acknowledged the special circumstances and reduced moral culpability of the appellant but determined that these factors did not outweigh the disproportionate nature of the sentence. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the appellant was re-sentenced to an aggregate term of ten years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of six years.

Orders