Legal Research
Cases
Maloney v The King

Maloney v The King

Case [2025] NSWCCA 156 1 October 2025

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Maloney v R [2025] NSWCCA 156
Hearing dates: 6 August 2025
Date of orders: 1 October 2025
Decision date: 01 October 2025
Before: Price AJA at [1]
Ierace J at [2]
Rigg J at [3]
Decision:
(1) Grant leave to appeal;
(2) Dismiss the appeal.

Catchwords:
CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – Commonwealth offence of transmitting child abuse material using a carriage service – State offence of possession of child abuse material – whether the sentencing judge erred in the assessment of objective seriousness of offending – whether the applicant’s motivation for the offending increased the objective seriousness – whether the sentencing judge erred by not considering the causative role of the applicant’s mental health in his motivation to offend – whether the sentence imposed is manifestly excessive – leave to appeal granted – appeal dismissed

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Criminal Appeal Act1912 (NSW)
Criminal Code (Cth)
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Bugmyv The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54
DS v R; DM v R (2022) 109 NSWLR 82; [2022] NSWCCA 156
Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
Lazarus v R [2023] NSWCCA 214; 380 FLR 228
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Noonan v R [2020] NSWCCA 346
R v Hutchinson [2018] NSWCCA 152
Zreika v R [2012] NSWCCA 44; 223 A Crim R 460

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Kieren Maloney (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
S Fraser (Applicant)
A Chhabra / M McCall (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Morrisons (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2022/00375425
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

30 August 2024

Before:

Baker SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2022/00375425

JUDGMENT

PRICE AJA: I agree with Rigg J.
IERACE J: I agree with the orders proposed by Rigg J and with her Honour's reasons.
RIGG J: The applicant, Mr Kieren Maloney, seeks leave pursuant to s 5(1)(c) of the Criminal Appeal Act1912 (NSW) to appeal against the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him by his Honour Baker SC DCJ in the District Court of New South Wales on 30 August 2024, following guilty pleas entered in the Local Court.
The applicant pleaded guilty to one count of transmitting child abuse material using a carriage service, contrary to s 474.22(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth). This offence has a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment. He also pleaded guilty to a related charge on a certificate pursuant to s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), that he possessed child abuse material contrary to s 91H(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). Although the maximum penalty for…

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 Maloney v The King

Details

AGLC: Maloney v The King [2025] NSWCCA 156
Case: [2025] NSWCCA 156
Decision Date: 01 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal before the court involved Maloney, who was found guilty of transmitting child abuse material using a carriage service and possessing child abuse material. The appeal was against the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge. Maloney argued that the sentencing judge had erred in assessing the objective seriousness of his offending, particularly in relation to his motivation for the offences and the role of his mental health in that motivation. He also claimed that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.

The court was required to determine whether the sentencing judge had erred in assessing the objective seriousness of Maloney's offending, and whether the judge had failed to consider the causative role of Maloney's mental health in his motivation to offend. The court also needed to consider whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The central issue was the appropriate weight to be given to the mitigating factors in the sentencing process.

The court found that the sentencing judge had not erred in assessing the objective seriousness of Maloney's offending, nor in failing to consider the causative role of Maloney's mental health in his motivation to offend. The court held that the sentencing judge had given appropriate weight to the mitigating factors, including Maloney's mental health, in determining the sentence. The court also found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive, taking into account the gravity of the offences. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

No further orders were made by the court.

Orders