R v Todoroski

The appeal arose from the case of R v Todoroski, where the respondent had been convicted of attempting to possess a marketable quantity of heroin. The Crown appealed against the sentence imposed, arguing that it was manifestly inadequate. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal. The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence was manifestly inadequate, and if the provisions of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 were picked up by the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth).

The court held that the appeal was not grounded on any specific error by the sentencing judge, but rather on a general dissatisfaction with the sentence. The court noted that the sentencing exercise was directed to individual justice, and that the sentence imposed was within the range of available penalties for the offence. The court also considered the provisions of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 and concluded that they were not picked up by the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The court found that the sentence was not manifestly inadequate, and dismissed the Crown’s appeal. The court did not make any orders as the appeal was dismissed.