R v Hernando

The appellant, Hernando, was convicted of robbery in company under section 97(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. The appellant and his co-offenders were found guilty of robbing a group of individuals at knifepoint. The Crown appealed against the sentence, arguing it was inadequate. The appellant subsequently appealed against his conviction, arguing that the delay in the Crown lodging its appeal resulted in prejudice to his case. The Court of Criminal Appeal was tasked with determining whether the delay in the Crown lodging its appeal impacted the fairness of the trial, and whether the sentence was appropriate.
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the delay in the Crown lodging its appeal prejudiced the appellant's case, and if the sentence imposed was adequate. The court considered the principles applicable to appeals by the Crown and those by convicted persons, recognising that different principles apply in each instance. The court also examined whether the delay in the Crown lodging its appeal was relevant to the fairness of the trial and whether it had any bearing on the adequacy of the sentence.
The court held that the delay in the Crown lodging its appeal did not prejudice the appellant's case. The court found that the appellant had not demonstrated any prejudice flowing from the delay, and that the trial remained fair. Furthermore, the court considered the adequacy of the sentence and concluded that it was appropriate in the circumstances. The court exercised its discretion under section 5D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) not to intervene despite finding an error in the proceedings.
The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appellant's appeal and affirmed his conviction and sentence. The Crown's appeal against the sentence was also dismissed.