Kerr v Regina

Kerr appealed against his sentence for three serious drug offences. The Crown opposed the appeal. The court was required to determine whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and whether the sentences should have been ordered to run concurrently. The court also needed to consider whether a lesser sentence was warranted under section 6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act.

The court considered that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive, as the offences were serious and involved large quantities of drugs. The court also noted that the sentences were ordered to run concurrently, which was appropriate given the nature of the offences. However, the court found that it was not appropriate for the sentences to run concurrently and that a lesser sentence was warranted. The court noted that the appellant had shown remorse and had cooperated with the authorities, and that a lesser sentence would provide an opportunity for rehabilitation. The court allowed the appeal and ordered that the sentences be reduced.

The final orders of the court were that the sentences for the three offences be reduced to a total of five years imprisonment, to be served concurrently. The appellant was also ordered to pay a fine of $10,000. The Crown was granted leave to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal.