Court of Criminal Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Young (a pseudonym) v R [2022] NSWCCA 111 Hearing dates: 27 May 2022 Date of orders: 3 June 2022 Decision date: 03 June 2022 Before: Bell CJ at [1];
Button J at [2];
N Adams J at [3].Decision: (1) Leave to appeal is granted.
(2) The appeal is allowed.
(3) The aggregate sentence imposed by Judge Haesler SC on 20 July 2021 is quashed; in lieu thereof, the respondent is sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 2 years’ of imprisonment to commence on 4 February 2021 and expire on 3 February 2023 with an aggregate non-parole period of 16 months to expire on 3 June 2022.
Catchwords: SENTENCING – appeal against sentence – manifest excess – difficult sentencing exercise – sexual offences committed on child when offender was also a child – Bugmy background – delay of 16-17 years between offending and charges laid – offender lost opportunity both to be dealt with as a child and to be dealt with prior to amendments to sentencing regime in 2018 – threshold in s 5 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 – objective seriousness of offending required custodial sentence – sentence did not reflect delay, age of applicant at time of offences and overwhelming subjective case – leave to appeal granted – appeal allowed
Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 4, 16, 17
Crimes Act1900 (NSW), ss 66C(1), 66D
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 25AA(1), 32, 44(2B), 53A, 67(1)(b)
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Sentencing Options) Act2017 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2103) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
JA v R [2021] NSWCC 10
Kliendienst v R [2020] NSWCCA 98
KT v R [2008] NSWCCA
MPB v R [2013] NSWCCA 213; 234 A Crim R 576
Obeid v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 155; [2017] NSWCCA 221
Paul Campbell v R [2018] NSWCCA 87
Texts Cited: New South Wales Legislative Assembly, Second Reading Speech, Criminal Legislation Amendment (Child Sexual Abuse) Bill 2018 (NSW) (Hansard),
6 June 2018
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Steven Young (a pseudonym) (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Mr K Averre (Applicant)
Ms E Nicholson (Respondent)
Legal Aid NSW (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/222921 Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 15A of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), publication of the names of, or any matter which could identify, the applicant and the victim is prohibited.
Pursuant to s 578A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) publication of any matter…
Continue reading Young (a Pseudonym) v R
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Young (a Pseudonym) v R [2022] NSWCCA 111
- Case
- [2022] NSWCCA 111
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the principles outlined in Bugmy, which emphasise the importance of proportionality and individualised sentencing. It acknowledged the significant delay of 16-17 years between the offending and the laying of charges, which resulted in the appellant losing the opportunity to be dealt with under the juvenile justice system and prior to the amendments to the sentencing regime in 2018. The court noted that the threshold for a custodial sentence, as established in section 5 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, requires consideration of both the objective seriousness of the offending and the subjective circumstances of the offender. The court concluded that the sentence did not appropriately account for the delay, the appellant's age at the time of the offences, and the compelling subjective case presented.
Given these considerations, the Court of Criminal Appeal granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal. The sentence imposed was deemed manifestly excessive, and the case was remitted to the sentencing court for re-sentencing. This decision underscores the importance of a comprehensive and balanced approach to sentencing in cases involving historical sexual offences, particularly where the offender was a child at the time of the offending.
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.