R v THOMPSON

The appeal concerned the sentencing of the appellant, Mr Thompson, by the Supreme Court of South Australia. The dispute arose from the appellant's sentence for present offences, which were committed while he was on parole for original offences. The remaining portion of his sentence for the original offences came into effect upon sentencing for the present offences, and the new sentence was ordered to be served cumulatively.

The central legal issues before the Full Court were whether the non-parole period fixed by the sentencing judge was manifestly excessive, whether the judge had properly accounted for the period of imprisonment served for breaches of parole, and whether the judge erred in not backdating the sentence to the date of the appellant's parole cancellation. The court was required to consider how time spent in custody for parole breaches should be treated in the context of a cumulative sentence and the determination of a non-parole period.

The Full Court dismissed the appeal, finding the non-parole period to be appropriate. The court reasoned that the period of time served for breaches of parole should not be deducted from the non-parole period itself. Instead, the sentencing judge was entitled to take this time into account by fixing the head sentence for the present offences by reference to a sentence that had already been reduced by the time spent in custody for those breaches. Furthermore, even if backdating the sentence to the date of parole cancellation were permissible, the court held that it would have been inappropriate in this case.

The court concluded that the sentencing judge had not erred in their approach. The cumulative nature of the sentence, the fact that the offences were committed on parole, and the time already served for parole breaches were all properly considered in arriving at the final sentencing orders.