Hutchins v The Queen

The appeal concerned the sentencing of the appellant, Hutchins, by a sentencing judge in South Australia. The dispute arose from the judge's calculation of a non-parole period for multiple offences, including those relating to the administration of justice and property offences, specifically trespass to land. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of South Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the sentencing judge had erred in applying section 54 of the *Sentencing Act 2017* (SA). Specifically, the court had to determine if the judge had improperly taken into account the unexpired parole period from earlier offending when calculating the minimum non-parole period under the four-fifths rule.

The Court of Appeal found that the sentencing judge had indeed erred in this regard. The court reasoned that section 54 of the *Sentencing Act 2017* (SA) requires the sentencing judge to consider the four-fifths rule in relation to the sentence for the current offences, and not to be influenced by the unexpired parole period of prior sentences. The Court of Appeal determined that it was in the interests of justice for it to resentence the appellant, exercising its powers under section 158(7)(a) of the *Criminal Procedure Act 1921* (SA).

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, quashed the original sentence, and resentenced the appellant. The new sentence for the three subject offences was imprisonment for five years, six months, and 19 days, to be served cumulatively on the unexpired balance of the earlier sentence, resulting in a total head sentence of nine years, two months, and 11 days. A non-parole period of six years was fixed pursuant to section 47 of the *Sentencing Act 2017* (SA).