Parker v Tasmania

In *Parker v Tasmania*, the appellant, Parker, appealed against his sentence imposed by a judge of the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The dispute concerned the factual basis upon which the sentence was determined, with the appellant arguing that certain facts adverse to him, which he disputed, were not properly resolved before the sentencing judge made his decision.

The central legal issue before the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania was whether the sentencing judge had erred in proceeding to sentence Parker without resolving disputed facts that were adverse to the appellant. This raised the question of whether such an approach constituted a miscarriage of sentencing discretion and, by extension, whether it gave rise to an apprehension of bias.

The Full Court held that a sentencing judge must ensure that any facts adverse to an accused, which are disputed by the accused, are resolved before imposing sentence. Failing to do so, and instead proceeding on the basis of disputed facts, constitutes a fundamental error and a miscarriage of sentencing discretion. The Court reasoned that an accused person has a right to have the factual basis of their sentence determined fairly, and that proceeding on disputed facts undermines this right and can lead to an apprehension of bias. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the sentencing judge for re-sentencing.