R v Pallister

Case [2002] WASCA 68 (S)

R -v- PALLISTER [2002] WASCA 68 (S)



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2002] WASCA 68 (S)
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Case No:CCA:132/200115 FEBRUARY, 10 MAY & 7 AUGUST 2002
Coram:WALLWORK J
ANDERSON J
WHEELER J		28/03/02
7/10/02
24Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Application allowed
Sentence of imprisonment set aside
ISO restored
A
PDF Version
Parties:THE QUEEN
STEPHEN GRAY PALLISTER

Catchwords:
Criminal law
Sentence
Application to re-open Crown appeal
Applicant had served longer in prison prior to sentence than allowed for by Court of Appeal
Whether he should be credited with full period
Whether custody related to relevant offence

Legislation:
Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 87

Case References:
Anderson v The Queen (1996) 18 WAR 244
Arts and Briggs (1997) 93 A Crim R 56
Brittain (2001) 121 A Crim R 525
Brittain v The Queen [2001] WASCA 92
El Noor (2001) 123 A Crim R 123
Palmer v The Queen [1999] WASCA 253
Pantorno v The Queen (1989) 166 CLR 466
Postigilione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295
Quartermaine v The Queen [2002] WASCA 60
R v Campbell (No 2) (1981) 6 A Crim R 208
R v Wong (1995) 16 WAR 219
Thompson (2000) 113 A Crim R 295
Thompson v R (1999) 165 ALR 219
Thompson v The Queen [2000] WASCA 186
Vlek v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990153; 29 March 1999
McAdam v Robertson (1999) 73 SASR 360
R v Pallister [2002] WASCA 68
Rayner & Anor v ANZ Banking Group Ltd [2002] WASCA 82

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : R -v- PALLISTER [2002] WASCA 68 (S) CORAM : WALLWORK J
    ANDERSON J
    WHEELER J
HEARD : 15 FEBRUARY, 10 MAY & 7 AUGUST 2002 DELIVERED : 28 MARCH 2002 SUPPLEMENTARY
DECISION : 7 OCTOBER 2002 FILE NO/S : CCA 132 of 2001 BETWEEN : THE QUEEN
    Appellant

    AND

    STEPHEN GRAY PALLISTER
    Respondent



Catchwords:

Criminal law - Sentence - Application to re-open Crown appeal - Applicant had served longer in prison prior to sentence than allowed for by Court of Appeal - Whether he should be credited with full period - Whether custody related to relevant offence




Legislation:

Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 87



(Page 2)

Result:

Application allowed


Sentence of imprisonment set aside
ISO restored


Category: A


Representation:


Counsel:


    Appellant : Mr R E Cock QC
    Respondent : Mr D Grace QC


Solicitors:

    Appellant : State Director of Public Prosecutions
    Respondent : Michael Tudori



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

Anderson v The Queen (1996) 18 WAR 244
Arts and Briggs (1997) 93 A Crim R 56
Brittain (2001) 121 A Crim R 525
Brittain v The Queen [2001] WASCA 92
El Noor (2001) 123 A Crim R 123
Palmer v The Queen [1999] WASCA 253
Pantorno v The Queen (1989) 166 CLR 466
Postigilione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295

Continue reading R v Pallister

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Pallister [2002] WASCA 68 (S)
Case
[2002] WASCA 68 (S)
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Pallister involved the applicant, who had been convicted of criminal offences and sentenced to imprisonment. The applicant sought to have the Crown appeal against his sentence re-opened on the basis that he had served a longer period in prison prior to his sentence than was allowed for by the Court of Appeal. The legal issue at hand was whether the applicant should be credited with the full period of custody he had already served, and whether that custody was related to the relevant offence for which he was sentenced. This case was heard in the relevant court of appeal.
The court examined the legal framework governing the applicant's right to be credited for time served and the conditions under which such credit could be applied. The court found that the applicant was entitled to be credited for the full period of custody he had already served, as it was directly related to the relevant offence. The court determined that the applicant's sentence should be set aside and that the interim sentence of imprisonment should be restored. The applicant's application was allowed, and the sentence of imprisonment was set aside, with the interim sentence of imprisonment being restored.

The court's decision in R v Pallister highlights the importance of ensuring that a defendant is credited for the full period of custody they have already served, where that custody is directly related to the relevant offence. This case also underscores the need for the court to carefully consider the legal framework governing the applicant's right to be credited for time served and the conditions under which such credit can be applied. The outcome of this case is significant for ensuring that the rights of defendants are protected and that they are not unfairly disadvantaged by the length of time they have spent in custody prior to their sentence.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application allowed

Sentence of imprisonment set aside

ISO restored

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.