Achurch v The Queen (No 2)

In the matter of Achurch v The Queen (No 2), the applicant sought to reopen a Crown appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal against their sentence. The applicant had been convicted and sentenced for three offences: supply MDMA, supplying a commercial quantity of MDMA, and supplying a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. The applicant's initial appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal was dismissed, but the Crown subsequently appealed to the High Court of Australia. The High Court upheld the Crown's appeal, leading to the current application to reopen the Crown appeal.

The legal issues before the court were whether section 43 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 could be utilised to correct an error of law in the application of the sentencing principles in R v Way [2004] NSWCCA 131. The applicant argued that the Court of Criminal Appeal had applied the incorrect principles in sentencing and that, upon applying the correct principles, the sentences for the offences were contrary to law. The court needed to determine whether the applicant's appeal could be reopened to address these legal issues.

The court found that section 43 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 could be applied to correct the error of law in the application of the sentencing principles. The court held that the Court of Criminal Appeal had indeed applied the incorrect principles in sentencing, leading to sentences that were contrary to law. Consequently, the court granted the application to reopen the Crown appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal. The applicant's appeal would now be heard by the Court of Criminal Appeal, with the potential for a new sentencing determination.

The final orders of the court were that the application to reopen the Crown appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal was granted. The applicant's appeal against sentence would proceed to the Court of Criminal Appeal, which would review the sentencing determination in light of the correct principles identified by the court. The applicant's sentences for the three offences would be reconsidered, with the possibility of a new sentencing determination being made by the Court of Criminal Appeal.