Heard v The Queen

Heard appealed against his sentence for offences including burglary, obtaining property by deception, receiving stolen property, and riding in a stolen motor vehicle. The appeal was heard by Murrell CJ, Penfold and Ross JJ.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the sentence imposed upon Heard was manifestly excessive, thereby warranting appellate intervention.

The Court considered the principles governing appeals against sentence, particularly the threshold for demonstrating that a sentence is "manifestly excessive". This involves an assessment of whether the sentencing judge erred in principle or imposed a sentence that is disproportionate to the gravity of the offences and the circumstances of the offender. The Court weighed the objective seriousness of the offences against Heard's personal circumstances and the sentencing objectives of punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, and the protection of the community.

The Court allowed the appeal and varied the sentence.