Legal Research
Cases
Doyle v R

Doyle v R

Case [2022] NSWCCA 81 13 April 2022

Facilitation of Justice

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Doyle v R [2022] NSWCCA 81
Hearing dates: 16 March 2022
Date of orders: 13 April 2022
Decision date: 13 April 2022
Before: Bell CJ at [1]; Bellew J at [42]; Ierace J at [46]
Decision:
1. Leave to appeal is granted.
2. Appeal dismissed.

Catchwords:
CRIME — drug offences — supply prohibited drug — commercial quantity — where applicant entered early guilty plea — where sentencing judge applied a 25% discount for early guilty plea — whether sentencing judge erred in applying s 25D of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) to make that discount
CRIME — appeals — appeal against sentence — misapplication of principle — where applicant was entitled to a 25% sentencing discount for the utilitarian value of his early guilty plea pursuant to s 25D(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) — where sentencing judge applied a 25% sentencing discount to reflect the utilitarian value of the applicant’s guilty plea, in addition to his remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice — whether the Act requires separate consideration of the utilitarian value of a guilty plea, an offender’s remorse, and his or her willingness to facilitate the course of justice — whether sentencing judge erred in applying s 25D of the Act
CRIME — appeals — appeal against sentence — re-sentence — supplying a large commercial quantity of a prohibited drug — where the applicant participated in a purported drug transaction facilitated by undercover law enforcement officers — where no drugs in fact existed or were disseminated into the community — where the offence may not have been committed had authorities not facilitated it — weight to be given to hardship caused to family members by an offender’s incarceration
SENTENCING — appeal against sentence — sentence contrary to law — where applicant was entitled to a 25% sentencing discount for the utilitarian value of his early guilty plea pursuant to s 25D(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) — where sentencing judge applied a 25% sentencing discount to reflect the utilitarian value of the applicant’s guilty plea, in addition to his remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice — whether the Act requires separate consideration of the utilitarian value of a guilty plea, an offender’s remorse, and his or her willingness to facilitate the course of justice — whether sentencing judge erred in applying s 25D of the Act
SENTENCING — plea of guilty — sentencing discount for the utilitarian value of an early plea of guilty pursuant to s 25D of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) — multiple and distinct sentencing considerations which may be engaged by an early plea of guilty — where an early plea of guilty bears utilitarian value — where an early plea of guilty is indicative of remorse and/or willingness to facilitate the course of justice — whether sentencing judge erred in considering the applicant’s remorse…

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 Doyle v R

Details

AGLC: Doyle v R [2022] NSWCCA 81
Case: [2022] NSWCCA 81
Decision Date: 13 April 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Doyle was before the court on an appeal against his sentence for drug supply offences. The applicant had entered an early guilty plea for the supply of a large commercial quantity of a prohibited drug. The sentencing judge applied a 25% discount for the early guilty plea and additional reductions for the applicant’s remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice. The applicant argued that the sentencing judge misapplied section 25D of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) by applying a double discount for the early guilty plea.

The court had to decide whether the sentencing judge correctly applied section 25D of the Act by considering the applicant’s remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice in addition to the 25% discount for the early guilty plea. The court also had to consider whether the Act required separate consideration of these factors, and whether the judge erred in applying the discount.

The court found that the sentencing judge erred in applying section 25D of the Act. The court held that the 25% discount for the utilitarian value of the early guilty plea was sufficient and did not require separate consideration of remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice. The court concluded that the sentencing judge should have applied only the 25% discount for the early guilty plea, not additional reductions for remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice. The court ordered a re-sentencing of the applicant.

The court ordered that the applicant be re-sentenced by the Supreme Court, with the sentencing judge applying only the 25% discount for the utilitarian value of the early guilty plea, without considering additional factors such as remorse and willingness to facilitate the course of justice.

Orders