Musgrove v Millard

In the case of Musgrove v Millard, the appellant, Musgrove, sought leave to appeal against the sentence imposed by the lower court. Musgrove was found guilty of stalking and the unlawful installation of a tracking device, as well as multiple breaches of a violence restraining order and protective bail conditions. The dispute centred on the severity of the sentence imposed, specifically whether the sentences for the stalking and unlawful installation of a tracking device should run concurrently or consecutively. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal.

The legal issues the court was required to decide included whether the principle of double punishment, as outlined in section 11 of the Sentencing Act, applied and whether the trial judge had correctly identified the facts admitted or established for the purposes of sentencing. The court also needed to determine if the aggregate effective sentence of 16 months' imprisonment with parole eligibility was appropriate.

The court found that the principle of double punishment did apply in this case, as the stalking and unlawful installation of a tracking device offences were closely related. The court also found that the trial judge had not adequately identified the facts admitted or established for the purposes of sentencing. As a result, the court allowed the appeal, varied the sentence so that the 4 months sentence of imprisonment imposed for the stalking offence be served concurrently with the 8 month sentence of imprisonment imposed for the unlawful installation of a tracking device offence, and reduced the aggregate effective sentence to 12 months' imprisonment with parole eligibility. The parole eligibility period was set to take effect from 30 May 2011.