MacCormack

In the matter of MacCormack, the applicant sought an application under section 188(1) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) to reopen a sentence imposed on him. The applicant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for a federal offence, which was to be served cumulatively on another term of imprisonment for a state offence. The federal sentence was to commence immediately upon the expiration of the incarceration in respect of the state sentence. The applicant argued that the federal sentence should have commenced immediately after the end of the non-parole period in respect of the state sentence. The legal issue before the court was whether the commencement date of the federal sentence should have been directed to commence immediately after the end of the non-parole period in respect of the state sentence.

The court considered the relevant statutory provisions and found that the applicant's argument was not supported by the plain language of the legislation. The court held that the federal sentence was to commence immediately upon the expiration of incarceration in respect of the state sentence, as required by the sentencing order. The court noted that the applicant had been afforded an opportunity to argue for a different commencement date for the federal sentence, but had not done so at the time of sentencing. The court found that the applicant's application to reopen the sentence was an attempt to re-litigate the sentencing decision, which was not permissible under the legislation. The court dismissed the application for an extension of time and the substantive application for the reopening of sentence. The court held that the applicant's argument was not supported by the plain language of the legislation and that the sentencing order was valid and should be enforced as it stood.