Lahni Wood v The Queen

The appellant, Lahni Wood, appealed against the sentence imposed by the trial judge, arguing that it was manifestly excessive and that there was an undue disparity between her sentence and that of her co-offenders. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal. Wood had participated in a vigilante attack with three others, charged with aggravated burglary and common law assault. Wood's role was primarily, though not exclusively, as the navigator.

The legal issues before the court were whether there was an error in the assessment of Wood's role in the offending, whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, and whether there was an undue disparity in the sentences of the co-offenders. The court examined the totality of Wood's role, including her participation in the planning and execution of the attack, and her role as the navigator. The court also considered the principle of parity in sentencing and whether the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range.

The court found that there was no error in the assessment of Wood's role in the offending, but that the sentence imposed was excessive and there was an undue disparity between her sentence and that of her co-offenders. The court acknowledged that Wood had a justifiable sense of grievance, but held that the sentence of 3 years and 2 months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive. However, to achieve appropriate parity and to bring the sentence into line with that of her co-offender, the court allowed the appeal and resentenced Wood to 2 years and 7 months' imprisonment. The court refused the application of the co-offender, Bell, who argued that his sentence of 4 years and 5 months' imprisonment was manifestly excessive, holding that it was within the appropriate range.

The court ordered that Wood be resentenced to 2 years and 7 months' imprisonment, to be served from the date of her original sentencing. The court also ordered that the appeal of Bell be dismissed, and that he continue to serve his original sentence.