Russell Tilley v The Queen (No 2)

The appeal in *Russell Tilley v The Queen (No 2)* was brought before the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, constituted by Refshauge ACJ, Penfold and Buchanan JJ. The dispute concerned the appellant's sentence, specifically the determination of a non-parole period in light of the provisions of Part 5.2 of the *Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005* (ACT).

The central legal issue before the Court was whether a non-parole period could be lawfully set to "co-terminate" with a portion of a sentence that was to be served by way of periodic detention. This involved an interpretation of the statutory framework governing the imposition of sentences and non-parole periods in the ACT.

The Court reasoned that the *Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005* (ACT) did not permit a non-parole period to co-terminate with a period of periodic detention. The statutory scheme contemplated distinct periods of detention, and the legislative intent was to ensure that the non-parole period represented a minimum period of actual custody before release, separate from any period served intermittently. Consequently, the Court found that the original sentencing order, which had allowed for such co-termination, was erroneous.

The appeal was upheld in part, indicating that the sentence was varied to rectify the error in the non-parole period calculation.