SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL
Case Title: | The Queen v Low |
Citation: | [2022] ACTCA 59 |
Hearing Date: | 16 May 2022 |
DecisionDate: | 27 October 2022 |
Before: | Mossop, Loukas-Karlsson and Rangiah JJ |
Decision: | The appeal is dismissed. |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL – prosecution appeal against sentence – whether sentencing judge acted upon wrong principle in assessing circumstantial evidence – whether sentencing judge made finding of fact that was unreasonable – whether sentencing judge failed to take into account mandatory consideration when ordering ICO – whether sentence manifestly inadequate – appeal dismissed |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 11, 33, 42 |
Cases Cited: | Barbaro v The Queen [2014] HCA 2; 253 CLR 58 |
Parties: | The Queen ( Appellant) Jake Low ( Respondent) |
Representation: | Counsel K Lee ( Appellant) F J Purnell SC ( Respondent) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions ( Appellant) Tim Sharman Solicitors ( Respondent) | |
File Number: | ACTCA 57 of 2021 |
Decision under appeal: | Court/Tribunal: Supreme Court of the ACT Before: Elkaim J Date of Decision: 1 November 2021 Case Title: R v Low Citation: [2021] ACTSC 285 |
THE COURT:
Introduction
On 1 December 2021, the respondent to this appeal was sentenced to 34 months’ imprisonment to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order (R v Low [2021] ACTSC 285 (primary judgment)). For the sake of clarity, the respondent will be referred to as the offender in this judgment, and the appellant will be referred to as the prosecution.
The offender was sentenced for one count of trafficking in a controlled substance other than cannabis (namely, cocaine) contrary to s 603(7) of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT). The sentencing judge assessed the appropriate starting point for the sentence as 46 months which was reduced by “just under” 25% on account of the offender’s plea of guilty, resulting in a total sentence of…
Continue reading The Queen v Low
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- The Queen v Low [2022] ACTCA 59
- Case
- [2022] ACTCA 59
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the appellate court were whether the sentencing judge had applied the wrong principle in evaluating the circumstantial evidence presented, whether a specific finding of fact made by the sentencing judge was so unreasonable as to warrant appellate intervention, and whether the sentencing judge had failed to take into account a mandatory consideration when making the decision to impose an intensive correction order. Furthermore, the court was asked to determine if the sentence imposed was so inadequate as to be manifestly so.
The appellate court dismissed the appeal. While the specific reasoning for this dismissal is not detailed in the provided text, the outcome indicates that the court found no error in the sentencing judge's assessment of the evidence, the factual findings made, the consideration of mandatory requirements for an ICO, or the adequacy of the sentence imposed. The court was not persuaded that the sentencing judge had acted upon a wrong principle or that the sentence was manifestly inadequate.
Orders
Orders of the court
The appeal is dismissed.
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.