SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL
Case Title: | R v Lee |
Citation: | [2016] ACTCA 69 |
Hearing Date: | 31 October 2016 |
DecisionDate: | 15 December 2016 |
ReasonsDate: | 15 December 2016 |
Before: | Murrell CJ, Refshauge and Rangiah JJ |
Decision: | Appeal dismissed. |
Catchwords: | APPEAL – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal against sentence – whether good behaviour order can commence before associated sentence of imprisonment –interpretation of “any longer period” – Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) s 12 – appeal dismissed |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) 40, 42, 86, 110 Crimes (Sentencing and Restorative Justice) Amendment Act 2016 (ACT) s 2 Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) ss 37E, 37O |
Cases Cited: | Everett v The Queen [1994] HCA 49; 181 CLR 295 Green v The Queen [2011] HCA 49; 244 CLR 462 Victims Compensation Fund Corporation v District Court of New South Wales [2002] NSWCA 355 |
Texts Cited: | Explanatory Statement, Crimes (Sentencing) Bill 2005 (ACT) cl 12 |
Parties: | The Queen (Appellant) Huy Huu Lee (Respondent) |
Representation: | Counsel Mr J White SC (Appellant) Mr M Kukulies-Smith (Respondent) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Appellant) Kamy Saeedi Law (Respondent) | |
File Number: | ACTCA 3 of 2016 |
Decision under appeal: | Court: ACT Supreme Court Before: Burns J Date of Decision: 15 December 2015 Case Title: R v Lee Citation: [2015] ACTSC 415 |
THE COURT:
The appellant appealed against a sentence imposed on the respondent by Burns J (the sentencing judge) on 15 December 2015 for the offence of trafficking in a trafficable quantity of cannabis contrary to s 603(5) of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) (Criminal Code): R v Lee [2015] ACTSC 415.
The respondent was sentenced to 13 months’ imprisonment to commence on 15 December 2015 and end on 14 January 2017. The period 15 December 2015 to 14 June 2016 was be served by way of periodic detention. The balance of the sentence was suspended. The sentencing judge made a good behaviour order with conditions for a period of 20 months commencing on 15 December 2015, the day upon which the sentence was imposed.
The appellant appealed on the ground that a good behaviour order under s 12(3) of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) (Sentencing Act) cannot commence before the date from which the associated sentence of imprisonment is suspended.
When the sentencing judge handed down the sentence, the prosecutor suggested that commencement…
Continue reading R v Lee
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Lee [2016] ACTCA 69
- Case
- [2016] ACTCA 69
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether a good behaviour order, pursuant to section 12 of the *Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005* (ACT), could commence prior to the expiry of an associated sentence of imprisonment. This required the Court to interpret the phrase "any longer period" as used in subsection 12(2) of the Act, which dictates the commencement of such orders.
The Court of Appeal considered the plain meaning of section 12(2) and concluded that the phrase "any longer period" referred to the period of imprisonment itself. Therefore, a good behaviour order could not commence before the completion of the associated sentence of imprisonment. The Court reasoned that to permit the good behaviour order to commence earlier would undermine the purpose of the sentencing legislation, which intended for the good behaviour bond to operate after the punitive element of the imprisonment had been served. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.