R v Murray

The case of R v Murray involved the applicant appealing against his sentences imposed after he pleaded guilty to multiple charges of indecent dealing and treatment of children under his care. The Supreme Court of Queensland was tasked with reviewing the appeal, which centred on whether the trial judge had correctly accounted for the applicant's pre-sentence custody in setting the parole eligibility date and the overall sentence. The applicant argued that his sentences were manifestly excessive and that the trial judge had failed to take into account the 309 days he had already spent in custody before the sentencing.

The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge had erred in not considering the applicant's pre-sentence custody when determining the parole eligibility date and the overall sentence, particularly in light of recent amendments to the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). The court had to determine if the trial judge's failure to declare the pre-sentence custody as time already served was a material error that warranted the sentences being set aside and re-imposed. The court also needed to consider whether the sentences were manifestly excessive, given the applicant's pre-sentence custody.

The Supreme Court found that the trial judge had indeed erred by not declaring the pre-sentence custody as time already served and in not taking this period into account when fixing the parole eligibility date and the head sentence. The court held that the sentences were manifestly excessive given the applicant's pre-sentence custody and the changes in the law that mandated such consideration. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the original sentences were set aside. The court re-imposed sentences that included suspended terms and probation, taking into account the pre-sentence custody and the applicant's consent to a probation order with specific conditions for treatment.