Woodhart v The Queen

The applicant, Woodhart, appealed to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia against a sentence imposed by the District Court. Woodhart and a co-accused were convicted by a jury of aggravated causing serious harm with intent to cause serious harm and aggravated causing harm with intent to cause harm, both offences under the *Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935* (SA), involving two victims. The sentencing judge imposed a head sentence of 14 years imprisonment, reduced to 13 years and eight months after accounting for time already served, with a non-parole period of eight years and eight months.

The central legal issues before the Full Court were whether the sentencing judge erred in principle by setting a manifestly excessive starting point for the sentence, and whether the sentences for the two counts should have been ordered to run concurrently, given they arose from the same incident. The applicant also sought an extension of time to bring his appeal, which was significantly out of time.

The Full Court reasoned that it was not reasonably arguable that the sentencing judge had erred in declining to order the sentences to be served concurrently, nor was it reasonably arguable that the overall sentence was manifestly excessive. Consequently, as the application for permission to appeal lacked merit, the Court found it unnecessary to determine the application for an extension of time. The application for permission to appeal was therefore refused.