Green v The Queen

The appeal concerned the severity of a determinate sentence imposed on the appellant by the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory. The appellant had initially been sentenced to an indefinite term of imprisonment in 1998, which was later discharged in 2004 and replaced with a determinate sentence. The appeal was heard by Martin (BR) CJ, Angel and Southwood JJ.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the determinate sentence imposed in 2004 should have been assessed by reference to sentencing standards applicable in 1998, when the indefinite sentence was imposed, or by reference to the standards applicable in 2004, at the time the determinate sentence was imposed. A further issue was whether the determinate sentence itself was manifestly excessive.

The court reasoned that the statutory scheme governing indefinite sentences, specifically section 74(1)(b) of the *Sentencing Act* (NT), mandated that sentences imposed following the discharge of an indefinite sentence should be based on sentencing practices extant at the time of the later sentencing. Angel J noted that the appellant's own conduct and lawful incarceration had contributed to the delay between the offence and the final sentencing, and therefore there was no occasion to apply earlier sentencing standards. The court also considered the appellant's argument that the determinate sentence was manifestly excessive, but concluded that given the seriousness of the crime and the absence of mitigating circumstances, the sentence was within the proper range available to the sentencing judge.

The appeal was dismissed, with the court finding that the determinate sentence was not manifestly excessive and that it had been correctly imposed by reference to contemporary sentencing standards.