The Queen v Buttery

The Queen, the Crown, appealed against a sentence imposed on the respondent, Buttery, for the offence of manslaughter. The dispute concerned whether the sentence was manifestly inadequate. The appeal was heard by Kelly, Blokland and Barr JJ.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentencing judge erred in imposing the sentence, and specifically, whether the sentence was manifestly inadequate given the objective seriousness of the offending and the mitigating factors. The court was required to determine if the discount applied to the respondent's sentence was within the sentencing judge's discretion and if the sentence adequately reflected the gravity of the offence and the circumstances of the offender.

The court affirmed that the felonious taking of human life is the starting point for sentencing in manslaughter cases and a key element in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence. While acknowledging the arguments presented by the Crown, the court found that the sentencing judge had taken all relevant matters into account, including the high degree of violence involved and the mid to high range gravity of the offending. The court also recognised the presence of important mitigating aspects relating to both the offending and the offender. The court noted the inherent complexity in sentencing offenders who are themselves victims and commit crimes against their victimisers, concluding that the sentence imposed struck the correct balance. The 20 per cent discount was considered to be within the sentencing judge's discretion and unexceptional.

The appeal was dismissed as the Crown failed to demonstrate any error or that the sentence was manifestly inadequate, failing to establish that it did not reflect the objective seriousness of the offending or was otherwise inadequate in all the circumstances.