Pickett v Tasmania

The appellant, Pickett, appealed against a sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of Tasmania following his plea of guilty to one count of aggravated armed robbery. The appeal concerned whether the sentence of seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years was manifestly excessive or unjustifiably disparate when compared to the sentences imposed on co-offenders.

The central legal issue before the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania was whether the sentencing judge erred in imposing a non-parole period of five years, thereby creating an unjustifiable disparity with the sentences of co-offenders and rendering the sentence manifestly excessive.

The Court allowed the appeal, finding that the sentencing judge had failed to adequately consider the parity principle in relation to the sentences of co-offenders. The Court reasoned that the appellant's role in the commission of the offence was less significant than that of his co-offenders, and that the disparity in the non-parole periods was not justified by any discernible difference in culpability or circumstances. Consequently, the Court varied the appellant's sentence by reducing the period of ineligibility for parole from five years to three and a half years.