Kennewell v Rand

The respondent, Kennewell, appealed against his conviction and sentence imposed by the County Court of Victoria for robbery, while the appellant, Rand, cross-appealed against the severity of the sentence. The court was required to determine whether the trial judge erred in his assessment of the circumstances of the offence and the appropriate sentence. The appeal hinged on the trial judge's consideration of the circumstances of the offence, particularly the degree of force used and the appellant's role in the crime. The appellant argued that the trial judge had not properly assessed the level of force used and had not adequately taken into account his lesser role in the crime. The court found that the trial judge had not erred in his assessment of the circumstances of the offence or in the sentence imposed. The court held that the trial judge had properly considered the degree of force used and the appellant's role in the crime. The court also held that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive or inappropriate. The appeal was dismissed, except to the extent necessary to re-sentence the appellant to take account of time spent in custody after the appeal was lodged. The appellant was re-sentenced to a head sentence of 29 months, and a non-parole period of 18 months, both backdated to 28 April 2008, with sentences for the individual offences as specified in the reasons for this decision.