Kelly v The Queen

Kelly was the appellant in a sentence appeal before the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales, with The Queen as the respondent. The appeal concerned the appellant's sentence, which he argued was manifestly excessive. Central to his argument was the principle of totality, and he contended that the sentencing judge had incorrectly grouped offences and failed to adequately consider the concurrency of sentences for primary and related offences. The appellant also argued that the sentencing judge had not performed a "last look" at the total sentence to ensure its overall appropriateness.

The Court of Criminal Appeal was required to determine whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, particularly in light of the appellant's submissions regarding the totality principle and the concurrency of sentences. This involved assessing whether the sentencing judge had erred in grouping the offences and in their approach to making sentences concurrent, as well as whether the final assessment of the total sentence was appropriate.

The Court dismissed the appeal. While the specific reasoning is not detailed in the provided text, the outcome indicates that the Court was not persuaded that the sentence was manifestly excessive or that the sentencing judge had made any errors in applying the principles of totality and concurrency. The Court likely found that the sentencing judge had correctly considered all relevant factors and applied the appropriate legal principles in determining the total sentence.