R v Featherstone (No 2)

In the case of R v Featherstone (No 2), the defendant pleaded guilty to an offence and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. The Crown indicated it would file a notice declining to proceed on one of the charges, and the proceedings proceeded on the understanding that this charge would not be proceeded with. The Supreme Court sentenced the defendant on the charge in question, leading to an appeal regarding the legality of the sentence. The central issue was whether the sentence was "contrary to law" under section 61 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), given the Crown's intention to decline to proceed with the charge.

The court considered whether the defendant was required to confirm adherence to the plea of guilty to be sentenced in the Supreme Court under section 90A(8) of the Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT). The court held that the Crown's intention to decline to proceed with the charge was sufficient to negate the need for the defendant to confirm their plea of guilty. The court found that the sentence imposed on the charge was not "contrary to law" as the Crown's intention to decline the charge meant that the defendant was not prejudiced by the sentence. The court concluded that the sentence was lawful and dismissed the appeal.

The court's reasoning was based on the interpretation of section 90A(8) of the Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT) and the understanding that the Crown's intention to decline to proceed with a charge meant that the charge would not proceed. The court found that the defendant was not required to confirm their plea of guilty in the Supreme Court, and the sentence imposed was lawful. The court dismissed the appeal, and the orders made by the court were as noted in the judgement at [22].