Giangiulio v The State of Western Australia

The appellant has appealed against sentence. He has applied for an extension of time within which to appeal and for leave to appeal on two grounds. The first ground alleges that the sentences imposed on the appellant infringed the parity principle. The second ground alleges that the appellant's total effective sentence infringed the first limb of the totality principle. The appeal is dismissed. The Court grants the appellant's application for an extension of time within which to appeal. Leave to appeal is granted on ground 1 and refused on ground 2. Neither ground of appeal has been made out. The Court finds that the absence of materially greater disparity in favour of the appellant between the individual sentences for count 1 and the absence of any disparity between Mr Liadow's sentence for count 1 and the appellant's total effective sentence for counts 1 and 2 did not infringe the parity principle or the principle of equal justice. The Court finds that the total effective sentence of 11 years' imprisonment imposed on the appellant was proportionate to the overall criminality of the appellant's conduct in all of the circumstances of the case.