Mills v The King

The appeal concerned the sentence imposed on the appellant, Mills, by the District Court of South Australia. The dispute revolved around the non-parole period set by the sentencing judge, which the appellant argued was excessive. The appeal was heard by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether the non-parole period of just over 40 per cent of the head sentence was manifestly excessive, thereby providing grounds for interference on appeal.

The Court acknowledged that the non-parole period was "very low" and indicated that it clearly reflected the sentencing judge's considerations regarding the appellant's intellectual functioning, the likely hardship she would experience in custody, and her prospects for rehabilitation. Despite this observation, the Court concluded that the appeal against the sentence should be dismissed, although permission to appeal was granted.