‘Leading steps aright’: Judicial guideline judgments in New South Wales

References

• Ashworth, A (1984) ‘Techniques of Guidance on Sentencing’, Criminal Law Review, pp 519–530.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth, A (1987a) ‘Criminal Justice, Rights and Sentencing: A Review of Sentencing Policy and Problems’ in Potas, I (ed) Sentencing in Australia: Issues, Policy and Reform, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth, A (1987b) ‘Closing Summary’ in Potas, I (ed) Sentencing in Australia: Issues, Policy and Reform, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth, A (1998a) ‘Structuring Sentencing Discretion’ in von Hirsch, A & Ashworth, A (eds) Principled Sentencing: Readings on Theory and Policy, 2nd edition, Hart Publishing, Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth, A (1998b) ‘Four Techniques for Reducing Sentence Disparity’ in von Hirsch, A & Ashworth, A (eds) Principled Sentencing: Readings on Theory and Policy, 2nd edition, Hart Publishing, Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth, A (2000) Sentencing & Criminal Justice, 3rd edition, Butterworths, London.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, L, Poletti, P & Potas, I (2002) Sentencing dangerous drivers in New South Wales: Impact of the Jurisic guidelines on sentencing practice, Monograph Series No 21, Judicial Commission of New South Wales, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, L & Poletti, P (2003) ‘Sentencing Trends for Armed Robbery and Robbery in Company: The Impact of the Guideline in R v Henry’ in Sentencing Trends & Issues No 26, Judicial Commission of New South Wales, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Bryant W C, ‘To a Waterfowl’ (1818) extracted in R Tripp (1970, reprinted 1985), The Penguin International Thesaurus of Quotations, Penguin Books, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Cowdery, N (1999) ‘Guideline Sentencing: A Prosecution Perspective’, Judicial Officers' Bulletin, vol 11, no 8, pp 57–61.
   Google Scholar
• Home Office, United Kingdom (2001) Making Punishments Work: Report of a Review of the Sentencing Framework for England and Wales, Home Office Communications Directorate, London.
   Google Scholar
• Home Office, United Kingdom Delivering Justice for All—Criminal Justice Bill Receives Royal Assent, Press Release 21 November 2003, <http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk>, viewed 4 December 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Johns, R (2002) ‘Sentencing Law: A Review of Developments in 1998–2001’, New South Wales Parliamentary Briefing Paper 2/2002, <www.parliament.nsw.gov.au> viewed 31 January 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby, MD (1980) ‘Sentencing Reform: Help in the “Most Painful” and “Unrewarding” of Judicial Tasks’, Australian Law Journal, vol 54, pp 732–743.
   Google Scholar
• Loukas, C (2003) ‘Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Standard Minimum Sentencing) Act’, <http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/pdo.nsf/pages/CrimesSentencingProcedure>, viewed 19 September 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Lovegrove, A (2002) ‘Intuition, Structure and Sentencing: An Evaluation of Guideline Judgments’, Current Issues in Criminal Justice, vol 14, no 2, pp 182–204.
   Google Scholar
• Marien, M (2002) ‘Standard Non-Parole Sentencing: The New Sentencing Reforms’, Judicial Officer's Bulletin, vol 14, no 11, pp 83–87.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, N & Murray, B (1999) ‘What's in a Name? Guideline Judgments in Australia’, Criminal Law Journal, vol 23, no 2, pp 90–107.
   Google Scholar
• New South Wales Parliamentary Debates (Legislative Assembly), Second Reading Speech, Criminal Legislation Amendment Bill 2001, 30 November 2001.
   Google Scholar
• New South Wales Parliamentary Debates (Legislative Assembly), Second Reading Speech, Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Standard Minimum Sentencing) Bill 2002, 23 October 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Spears, D (1999) ‘Structuring Discretion: Sentencing in the Jurisic Age’, University of New South Wales Law Journal Forum, vol 5, no 1, pp 18–20.
   Google Scholar
• Spigelman, JJ (1999) ‘Sentencing Guideline Judgments’, Australian Law Journal, vol 73, no 12, pp 876–884.
   Google Scholar
• Tonry, M (2002) ‘Setting sentencing policy through guidelines’ in Rex, S & Tonry, M (eds) Reform and Punishment: The Future of Sentencing, Willan Publishing in association with the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Uffculme Cullompton, Devon.
   Google Scholar
• Warner, K (2002) ‘Case and Comment—Wong and Leung’, Criminal Law Journal, vol 26, pp 59–63.
   Google Scholar
• Warner, K (2003) ‘The role of guideline judgments in the law and order debate in Australia’, Criminal Law Journal, vol 27, no 1, pp 8–22.
   Google Scholar