SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | Barron v Laverty |
Citation: | [2019] ACTSC 198 |
Hearing Dates: | 15 July 2019, 30 July 2019 |
DecisionDate: | 30 July 2019 |
Reasons Date: | 31 July 2019 |
Before: | Murrell CJ |
Decision: | Appeal allowed. The appellant is re-sentenced to a total sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 13 months. |
Catchwords: | APPEAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – When the appellant committed multiple family violence offences – When the sentencing magistrate accumulated the sentence for five of the six offences – Whether the total sentence was manifestly excessive by reason of the accumulation – Whether the non-parole period was manifestly excessive – Whether the sentencing magistrate erred in applying an incorrect maximum penalty SENTENCING – STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – Suspended Sentence – Where the appellant breached the good behaviour order attached to a suspended sentence – Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) s 110(2) – Difference between “impose the suspended sentence” under s 110(2)(a) and “re-sentence” under s 110(2)(b) – Whether the court may re-sentence an offender to a sentence more severe than the original sentence – Right not to be punished more than once – Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 24 – Whether the sentencing court afforded the appellant procedural fairness |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 16A Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) s 110 Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas) s 27(5) |
Cases Cited: | Achuthun v Coates (1986) 6 NSWLR 472 Baker v The Queen [2004] HCA 45; 223 CLR 513 |
Parties: | Michael Barron (Appellant) Nigel John Laverty (Respondent) |
Representation: | Counsel P Edmonds (Appellant) S Janackovic (Respondent) |
| Solicitors Canberra Criminal Lawyers (Appellant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent) | |
File Number: | SCA 9 of 2019 |
Decision under appeal: | Court/Tribunal: ACT Magistrates Court Before:… |
Continue reading Barron v Laverty
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Barron v Laverty [2019] ACTSC 198
- Case
- [2019] ACTSC 198
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the statutory interpretation of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) section 110(2) in relation to the imposition of a suspended sentence and subsequent breaches. The court considered the distinction between "impose the suspended sentence" under section 110(2)(a) and "re-sentence" under section 110(2)(b). The court also reviewed whether the court may re-sentence an offender to a sentence more severe than the original sentence and if the right not to be punished more than once under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) section 24 was afforded to the appellant. Furthermore, the court assessed whether the sentencing court provided the appellant with procedural fairness.
After considering the arguments and the applicable law, the court found that the total sentence was indeed manifestly excessive due to the accumulation of sentences. The court also concluded that the non-parole period was manifestly excessive. Additionally, the court determined that the sentencing magistrate erred in applying an incorrect maximum penalty for one of the offences. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the appellant was re-sentenced to a total sentence of imprisonment for 2 years with a non-parole period of 13 months.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed. The appellant is re-sentenced to a total sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 13 months.
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.