Karpany v The Queen

The appeal in *Karpany v The Queen* concerned the sentencing of the appellant for three distinct offences: a robbery committed in September 2019, a commercial burglary and property damage in February 2020, and a breach of bail in April 2019. The appellant had pleaded guilty to these offences. The sentencing judge imposed a sentence of five years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years, 11 months, and 16 days, after applying reductions for early pleas.

The appeal raised two primary legal issues. Firstly, the appellant contended that the sentencing judge erred in their interpretation of the expression "so exceptional" within the context of the appellant's personal circumstances, as contemplated by s 54(2)(a) of the relevant Act. Secondly, the appellant argued that their personal circumstances were sufficiently exceptional to outweigh the criteria outlined in s 54(2)(a), thereby preventing the operation of s 54(1)(b) of the Act, which mandates a minimum sentence in certain circumstances.

The Court of Appeal considered the appellant's extensive criminal history, which commenced in his youth and included numerous property and trespass offences, as well as a long-standing issue with illicit drug use. Despite the appellant's arguments regarding the exceptional nature of his personal circumstances, the Court found no demonstrable error in the sentencing judge's approach. The Court concluded that the sentencing judge's decision was not so unreasonable or unjust as to indicate an error, even if such an error was not immediately apparent from the face of the reasoning. Consequently, the Court granted permission to appeal but ultimately dismissed the appeal.