Criminal law - Sentencing - Armed robbery - Attempted armed robbery - Breach of recognisance - Possession of heroin - The range of sentences commonly imposed - The extent of a discount for a guilty plea - Concurrent or cumulative sentences - One transaction rule - Totality principle - Set aside sentences, impose sentences in lieu thereof - Confirm commencement date of sentence and eligibility for parole

Legislation:

Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s8(2)

Result:

Leave to appeal granted
Appeal allowed

Category: D

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant: Ms K J Farley
Respondent: Mr S E Stone

Solicitors:

Applicant: Unrepresented Criminal Appellants' Scheme
Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Atholwood v The Queen (1999) 109 A Crim R 465
Attorney-General (SA) v Tichy (1982) 30 SASR 84
Brown (1982) 5 A Crim R 404
Carey (1975) 11 SASR 575
Cork v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970664; 2 December 1997
Coyne v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; No 2325 of 1978
Esteban v Wolpers, unreported; SCt of WA; 7376 of 1988; 16 November 1988
Haslam (unreported) 24.11.72, 4151/B/72
Jarvis v The Queen (1993) 20 WAR 201
Lewis (unreported) 3.7.72, 3119/B/73
Little v The Queen [2001] WASCA 87
McKeagg v The Queen [2001] WASCA 99
Miles v The Queen (1997) 17 WAR 518
Morgan (1971) 56 Cr App R 181
Norman v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 9489; 1 February 1989
R v Legg, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980305; 9 April 1998
R v Ruane [1979] 1 A Crim R 284
Radebe v The Queen [2001] WASCA 254
Shaw (1989) 39 A Crim R 343
Smith [1972] Crim L R 124
Stretton v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 950282; 1 June 1995
Ugle v Wells (1999) 106 A Crim R 452
Young [1973] CLR 585

Case(s) also cited:

Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610
R v Peterson [1984] WAR 329

WALLWORK J: I agree with the reasons of Einfeld AJ and to the orders proposed by his Honour. There is nothing I wish to add.
ROBERTS-SMITH J: I have had the benefit of reading in draft the judgment of Einfeld AJ and I gratefully adopt his Honour's recitation of the facts of this matter and his outline of the proceedings before the learned sentencing Judge.
It is now well established that in the absence of some particular circumstance militating otherwise, an early plea of guilty should attract a substantial discount in sentence. In Atholwood v The Queen (1999) 109 A Crim R 465, Ipp J said (at…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Pieri v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Pieri v The Queen [2001] WASCA 357
Case: [2001] WASCA 357
Decision Date: 14 NOVEMBER 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was brought by Pieri, the defendant, against a judgment and sentence handed down by the Supreme Court of Victoria. Pieri was convicted of multiple charges, including armed robbery, attempted armed robbery, breach of recognisance, and possession of heroin. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia, the final appellate court in Australia. The central issue was the appropriateness of the sentences imposed by the lower court, specifically whether the sentences were excessive or inadequate given the nature and circumstances of the offences.

The High Court was required to consider several legal issues. These included the range of sentences typically imposed for the types of offences committed, the extent to which a discount should be applied for Pieri's guilty plea, and whether the sentences should be concurrent or cumulative. The court also needed to determine if the one transaction rule or the totality principle applied to the sentencing, and whether it was appropriate to set aside the existing sentences and impose new ones in their place. Additionally, the court had to decide on the commencement date of the sentence and Pieri's eligibility for parole.

In its judgment, the High Court found that the original sentences imposed by the lower court were inadequate. The court determined that a greater discount should have been applied for Pieri's guilty plea and that the sentences should have been cumulative rather than concurrent. The one transaction rule was deemed applicable, and the totality principle was considered in setting the overall sentence. The High Court set aside the original sentences and imposed new sentences in their place, confirming the commencement date and Pieri's eligibility for parole. The Court held that the new sentences more accurately reflected the seriousness of the offences and provided a just outcome for all parties involved.

Orders