Legal Research
Cases
Lane v The King

Lane v The King

Case [2025] NSWCCA 113 4 August 2025

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available
Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Lane v R [2025] NSWCCA 113
Hearing dates: 24 February 2025
Decision date: 04 August 2025
Before: Garling J at [1];
Lonergan J at [2];
Ierace J at [3]
Decision:
(1)   Grant leave to appeal;
(2)   Appeal allowed in respect of ground 1;
(3)   Quash the sentence imposed in the District Court on 12 April 2024 and in lieu thereof impose an aggregate sentence of 6 years, to commence on 24 May 2023 and to expire on 23 May 2029, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months, to expire on 23 November 2026.

Catchwords:
CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Where applicant convicted of Commonwealth offences relating to child abuse material — Whether sentencing judge has acted on a wrong principle with respect to the applicant’s mental health and its connection to the offending behaviour — De La Rosa principles

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 9, since repealed
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 16A, 16A(2AAA), 16BA
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 272.14(1), 474.22(1), 474.22A(1)
Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 233BAB(5)
Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW), s 28

Cases Cited:
Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
DS v R (2022) 109 NSWLR 82; [2022] NSWCCA 156
Elchaar v R [2025] NSWCCA 50
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37
McBeth v R [2009] NSWCCA 235
Minehan v R [2010] NSWCCA 140; (2010) 201 A Crim R 243
R v Hutchinson [2018] NSWCCA 152

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Timothy John Lane (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
D Dalton SC (Applicant)
C J Tran / O J Ronan (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Nicola Velcic & Associates (Applicant)
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2023/112143
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Date of Decision:

12 April 2024

Before:

N Williams DCJ

File Number(s):

2023/112143

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

On 12 April 2024, following his pleas of guilty to four Commonwealth offences relating to accessing, possessing, importing and transmitting child abuse material and two counts of procuring a child to engage in sexual activity outside Australia, Timothy Lane (the applicant) was sentenced by N Williams DCJ to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 7 years, to commence on 24 May 2023 and expire on 23 May 2030, with a non-parole period of 4 years and 3 months, expiring on 23 August 2027. A further count of using a carriage service to transmit child abuse material was taken into account in the sentence of one of those offences.

The applicant sought leave to appeal the sentence imposed pursuant to s 5(1)(c) of the Criminal…

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 Lane v The King

Details

AGLC: Lane v The King [2025] NSWCCA 113
Case: [2025] NSWCCA 113
Decision Date: 04 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Lane, appealed against the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge following a conviction for Commonwealth offences related to child abuse material. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia. Lane argued that the sentencing judge had erred in not adequately considering his mental health and how it connected to his offending behaviour. This argument was grounded in the principles articulated in the De La Rosa case, which require that the mental health of an offender be properly assessed and considered when determining an appropriate sentence.

The legal issues before the court included whether the sentencing judge had failed to consider Lane's mental health in accordance with the principles established by De La Rosa. This involved an examination of whether the sentencing judge had correctly identified, assessed, and weighed the impact of Lane's mental health on his offending behaviour. The court also had to determine if this failure to adequately consider Lane's mental health constituted a miscarriage of justice that warranted a reduction in the sentence imposed.

The court found that the sentencing judge had indeed erred by not adequately considering the impact of Lane's mental health on his offending behaviour. The court noted that while the sentencing judge had mentioned Lane's mental health, the consideration was not comprehensive and did not sufficiently inform the sentencing decision. The court concluded that the sentencing judge had not fully applied the principles set out in De La Rosa, leading to an inappropriate sentence. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the sentencing judge for reconsideration with a proper application of the relevant principles.

The final orders included the appeal being allowed and the matter being remitted to the sentencing judge for re-sentencing, with a directive to consider Lane's mental health in accordance with De La Rosa principles. The court also directed the sentencing judge to provide written reasons for the new sentence, ensuring that Lane's mental health was appropriately factored into the sentencing decision.

Orders