GG v Police

The appellant, GG, pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery. The dispute arose because the sentencing Magistrate credited GG with only seven weeks for time spent in custody and quasi-custody, despite GG having spent 91 days in custody and further time on home detention and electronically monitored curfew. GG contended that the Magistrate erred by not providing sufficient credit or reasons for the lesser credit. The appeal was heard by Lovell, Bleby, and David JJ.

The Court was required to determine whether the Magistrate erred in the sentencing discretion by failing to adequately credit the appellant for time spent in custody and quasi-custody. The Court also considered whether it should exercise an independent sentencing discretion if an error was identified, and if so, whether to impose a lesser sentence or the same or a greater sentence.

The Court allowed the appeal, finding that the appellant was entitled to be credited for the full 91 days spent in custody. Applying the principles from *House v The King*, the Court exercised its independent sentencing discretion. While acknowledging the Magistrate's experience with youth offenders, the Court determined that, after allowing for the plea discount and time already served, the appellant had effectively served the sentence.

Consequently, the Court granted an extension of time to appeal, allowed the appeal, set aside the sentence imposed by the Youth Court, and ordered that, taking into account time already spent in custody, there be no further penalty without conviction.