Young v The King

The appeal concerned the sentencing of the appellant, who had been convicted of cultivating cannabis for sale and trafficking in a large commercial quantity of a controlled drug. The dispute arose because the sentencing judge had not taken into account the periods the appellant had spent in custody and on home detention bail, as neither party had raised these matters during the sentencing hearing. The respondent conceded that this omission constituted a significant error, not a mere technicality, and that the sentence was therefore not amenable to rectification under s 20(1) of the Sentencing Act 2017 (SA). The Supreme Court of South Australia, constituted by Acting Livesey CJ and Bleby J, heard the appeal.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the sentencing judge's failure to consider the appellant's pre-sentence custody and home detention bail amounted to an error that necessitated allowing the appeal and resentencing the appellant. The Court was required to determine if this oversight was a substantial error that warranted setting aside the original sentence and imposing a new one, given the respondent's concession.

The Court accepted the respondent's concession that the failure to account for the time spent in custody and on home detention bail was a significant error that prevented the original sentence from being a just one. The Court reasoned that such periods are material considerations in sentencing and their omission meant the sentence did not reflect the true extent of the appellant's deprivation of liberty. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the original sentence, and ordered that the appellant be resentenced.