SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL
Case Title: | Henderson v The King | |
Citation: | [2024] ACTCA 3 | |
Hearing Date: | 7 November 2023 | |
Decision Date: | 12 February 2024 | |
Before: | Loukas-Karlsson, Baker and McWilliam JJ | |
Decision: | See [73] | |
Catchwords: | APPEAL – CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – whether “exceptional circumstances” must exist before an Intensive Corrections Order could be imposed in respect of both offences – where appellant was sentenced on the basis that he possessed the child abuse material for more than one day contrary to particularised charge – errors conceded by the prosecution – resentencing – admission of fresh evidence regarding hardship in custody - interaction between childhood disadvantage and mental illness – appeal allowed – appellant resentenced | |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 16A, 20, 20AB, 232ZD Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 474, 474A Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) s 11 Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1991 (ACT) s 111 | |
Cases Cited: | Barbaro v The Queen [2014] HCA 2; 253 CLR 58 Betts v The Queen [2016] HCA 25; 258 CLR 420 Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; 249 CLR 571 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v D’Alessandro [2010] VSCA 60; 26 VR 477 Kentwell v The Queen [2014] HCA 37; 252 CLR 601 R v De Simoni [1981] HCA 31; 147 CLR 383 R v Hagen [2022] ACTSC 362; 374 FLR 260 R v Hutchinson [2018] NSWCCA 152 R v Porte [2015] NSWCCA 174; 252 A Crim R 277 R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; 16 VR 240 The Queen v Ruwhiu [2023] ACTCA 18 | |
Texts Cited: | Explanatory Memorandum, Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures) Bill 2019 (Cth) | |
Parties: | Peter Henderson ( Appellant) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions ( Respondent) | |
Representation: | Counsel E Chen ( Appellant) K Breckweg ( Respondent) | |
| Solicitors ACT Legal Aid ( Appellant) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions | ||
File Number: | ACTCA 17 of 2023 | |
Decision under appeal: | Court/Tribunal: | ACT Supreme Court |
Before: | Norrish AJ | |
Date of Decision: | 11 May 2023 | |
Case Title: | R v Henderson | |
Citation: | ||
THE COURT:
Introduction
1․On 11 May 2023, the appellant was convicted and sentenced by Norrish AJ (the sentencing judge) of the following two offences:
(a)Count 1 – On 2 April 2022, using a carriage service to possess child abuse material contrary to s 474.22A(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) (CC2022/3204).
Imprisonment for 1 year and 10 months, with the offender to be released after four months’ imprisonment on entering a recognisance release order in the sum of $500 to be of good behaviour for two years…
Continue reading Henderson v The King
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Henderson v The King [2024] ACTCA 3
- Case
- [2024] ACTCA 3
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether "exceptional circumstances" were a prerequisite for imposing an Intensive Corrections Order in respect of both offences, and whether the appellant should be resentenced. The appeal also involved the admission of fresh evidence concerning hardship in custody, the interplay between childhood disadvantage and mental illness, and the overall appropriateness of the original sentence.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the original sentencing had proceeded on an erroneous basis. The Court considered the fresh evidence presented, which highlighted the appellant's significant childhood disadvantage and mental health issues, and how these factors contributed to hardship in custody. Applying these considerations, the Court determined that resentencing was warranted. The Court ultimately resentenced the appellant.
Orders
Orders of the court
See [73]
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.