Court of Criminal Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Summary available
Medium Neutral Citation: Shannon v R [2022] NSWCCA 41 Hearing dates: 14 February 2022 Date of orders: 4 March 2022 Decision date: 04 March 2022 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]
Bellew J at [2]
Dhanji J at [24]Decision: (1) The time for filing a notice of appeal for leave to appeal against sentence is extended to 14 February 2022.
(2) Leave to appeal is granted.
(3) The appeal is dismissed.
(4) The Registrar is to forward a copy of this judgment to the applicant by pre-paid post.Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Offences – Sentence – Appeal – Where applicant was arrested at a time when there were outstanding charges pending against him in the Local Court – Where the applicant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment in respect of those pending charges and served that sentence whilst awaiting sentence on other matters – Whether the failure of the sentencing judge to fully backdate the sentences amounted to a miscarriage of justice – Where applicant’s solicitor acquiesced to the approach taken by the sentencing judge – Ground of appeal not established – Leave to appeal granted – Appeal dismissed
CRIMINAL LAW – Offences – Sentence – Appeal – Where applicant sought to argue that his conditions of custody had been rendered more harsh as a consequence of the Covid pandemic and justified a reduction in sentence – Where applicant had been sentenced before the onset of the pandemic – Court unable to intervene where, after the time of sentence, an offender’s conditions of custody are rendered more onerous because of the response of the prison authorities to the pandemic – Ground of appeal not established – Leave to appeal granted – Appeal dismissed
Legislation Cited: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Cabezuela v R [2020] NSWCCA 107
Cahyadi v R (2007) 168 A Crim R 41; [2007] NSWCCA 1
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Habkouk [2022] NSWSC 98
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Saadieh [2021] NSWSC 1186
Greenyer v R [2016] NSWCCA 272
Rakielbakhour v DPP [2020] NSWSC 323
Zreika v R [2012] 223 A Crim R 460; [2012] NSWCCA 44
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kurt Patric Shannon – Applicant
Regina – RespondentRepresentation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Applicant self-represented
E Wilkins – Respondent
Applicant self-represented
C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) – Respondent
File Number(s): 2018/00201464 & 2018/00265641 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- District Court of NSW
- Jurisdiction:
- Criminal
- Citation:
- Date of Decision:
- 18 October 2019
- Before:
- Judge Bright
- File Number(s):
- 2018/00201464/2018/00265641
Judgment
-
MACFARLAN JA: I agree with Bellew J.
-
BELLEW J: Kurt Patric Shannon (the applicant) was arrested on 29 June 2018 and charged with the following offences (the present offences): [1]
1. The table is taken from the…
Continue reading Shannon v The The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Shannon v The The Queen [2022] NSWCCA 41
- Case
- [2022] NSWCCA 41
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the court had to determine were whether the failure of the sentencing judge to fully backdate the sentences amounted to a miscarriage of justice and whether the applicant's conditions of custody had been rendered more harsh as a consequence of the Covid pandemic and justified a reduction in sentence. The court found that the applicant's solicitor acquiesced to the approach taken by the sentencing judge and that the applicant's ground of appeal was not established. The court also found that it was unable to intervene where, after the time of sentence, an offender's conditions of custody were rendered more onerous because of the response of the prison authorities to the pandemic.
The court held that the applicant's ground of appeal was not established and dismissed the appeal. The court granted leave to appeal but dismissed the appeal as the applicant's solicitor had acquiesced to the approach taken by the sentencing judge, and the court was unable to intervene where, after the time of sentence, an offender's conditions of custody were rendered more onerous because of the response of the prison authorities to the pandemic. The court found that the applicant's conditions of custody had not been rendered more harsh as a consequence of the Covid pandemic and justified a reduction in sentence.
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.