McClellan CJ at CL at [1] Buddin J at [2] Schmidt J at [3]
Decision:
1. Leave to file the appeal out of time is granted.
2. Leave to appeal is granted.
3. The appeal is dismissed.
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against sentence - whether there was insufficient weight given to contrition and remorse - whether insufficient weight given to the forfeiture proceedings and money paid to the State of New South Wales - whether penalty imposed was manifestly excessive
William Michael Stock (Applicant) Regina (Respondent)
Representation
- Solicitors:
Solicitors: Ellis & Baxter Solicitors (Applicant) S Kavanagh, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown)
- Counsel:
Counsel: Mr G Jones with Mr Bassett (Applicant) Mr JA Girdham (Crown)
File number(s):
CCA No 2009/134996
Decision Under Appeal
- Court / Tribunal:
- Before:
Black J
- Date of Decision:
04 November 2009
- Citation:
- Court File Number(s)
34868/08/17
Publication Restriction:
Judgment
McCLELLAN CJ : I agree with Schmidt J.
BUDDIN J : I agree with Schmidt J.
SCHMIDT J : On 4 November 2009, the applicant was sentenced by Black DCJ as follows:
·Section 23(2)(a)…
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 Stock v R
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Stock v R [2011] NSWCCA 49
Case
[2011] NSWCCA 49
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Stock v R, the appellant, Mr Stock, sought to appeal against the sentence imposed upon him by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The nature of the dispute centred around the sentencing of Mr Stock, who was convicted of serious drug-related offences. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining whether the trial judge had given insufficient weight to certain factors, including Mr Stock's contrition and remorse, the forfeiture proceedings, and the money paid to the State of New South Wales.
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge had erred in failing to sufficiently consider the appellant's contrition and remorse, whether the judge had given insufficient weight to the forfeiture proceedings and the money paid to the State, and whether the penalty imposed was manifestly excessive. The court needed to assess whether these factors warranted a reduction in the sentence or if the sentence was appropriate given the gravity of the offences.
The Court of Appeal held that while the trial judge had considered the appellant's remorse, it was not sufficiently emphasised in the sentencing process. The court also found that insufficient weight had been given to the forfeiture proceedings and the money paid to the State, which should have been taken into account as mitigating factors. Furthermore, the court determined that the penalty imposed was indeed manifestly excessive, taking into account all relevant factors. As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the case was remitted to the trial judge for resentencing.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal against sentence be allowed, the conviction be upheld, and the matter be remitted to the trial judge for resentencing, with specific directions to give proper weight to the factors of contrition, remorse, forfeiture proceedings, and the money paid to the State of New South Wales.