Brougham v The King

The applicant, Brougham, appealed against a sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of South Australia following his conviction by a jury on four firearms offences. These offences related to the discovery of a loaded rifle with its serial number ground off, secreted in the roof of his garden shed, while he was subject to a Firearms Prohibition Order (FPO). The sentencing judge imposed a head sentence of four years and four months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years, seven months and seven days.

The central issue on appeal was whether the notional starting points determined by the sentencing judge for the offences of possessing a firearm and ammunition whilst subject to an FPO were manifestly excessive, thereby rendering the overall head sentence manifestly excessive. The applicant did not challenge the notional sentences for the other two offences: aggravated possession of a Category A firearm and possessing a firearm without a lawful identifying mark.

The Court of Appeal found that the notional starting points for the FPO breach offences were indeed manifestly excessive. However, despite this finding, the Court concluded that the overall head sentence, when considered in light of all the circumstances of the offending and the applicant's personal history, was not manifestly excessive. The Court noted that while the sentencing judge had imposed concurrent sentences, a combination of partial and full concurrency would have better reflected the aggravating features of the charges, which included the possession of a loaded firearm with a removed serial number, and the breach of the FPO.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal but dismissed the appeal, upholding the head sentence imposed by the sentencing judge.