Miles v The Queen

The appeal concerned the sentencing of the appellant, Miles, for offences including aggravated robbery. The appeal was heard by Murrell CJ, Penfold J, and Ross J in the ACT Court of Appeal.

The court was required to determine whether the sentence imposed for aggravated robbery was manifestly excessive, particularly in light of the parity principle and the impact of an earlier conviction appeal on the assessment of the objective seriousness of the offending. Additionally, the court considered whether the parity principle had any operation when a co-offender had been granted immunity from prosecution, and whether the appellant's lack of remorse and prospects for rehabilitation were appropriately considered, along with the nature of scheduled offences.

The court upheld the appeal in relation to the aggravated robbery sentence, finding it to be manifestly excessive. The reasoning involved a reassessment of the objective seriousness of the offending, taking into account the changed basis upon which the sentence was to be assessed following the earlier conviction appeal. The court also determined that the parity principle did not apply in the context of a co-offender who had been granted immunity.

Consequently, the appeal in ACTCA 18 of 2013 was dismissed, while the appeal in ACTCA 77 of 2013 was upheld. The appellant was resentenced for aggravated robbery to a term of imprisonment of 4 years, running from 5 January 2011 to 4 January 2015. This resulted in a reduction in the concurrency of sentences, leading to a new total effective sentence of 12 years and 1 month, with a non-parole period of 7 years and 7 months, commencing on 5 January 2011.