De Jesus v The Queen

[2000] WASCA 128

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug offences
4. › Possession of heroin with intent to sell or supply
5. › Whether aggregate sentence of 8 years' imprisonment manifestly excessive
6. › Mid-level drug dealing
7. › Heroin addict dealing to support addiction
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Pre-sentence custody
4. › Allowance for time spent in custody before sentence
5. › Whether time spent in custody was 'in respect of that offence and for no other reason'
6. › Sentenced prisoner also on remand
7. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 87
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Parole eligibility
4. › Whether parole eligibility should be ordered
5. › Effect of incorrect information provided to sentencing judge
6. › Applicant's history of parole breaches
7. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), ss 87, 89(2)(d)

Quick Take

Section 87 of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) does not permit backdating of a sentence where the offender was in custody as a sentenced prisoner serving the unexpired portion of previously imposed sentences, even if also on remand for the offences being sentenced. The reason why the offender 'spent time in custody' (not the reason for being taken into custody) is decisive. A sentencing judge's refusal to order parole eligibility will not be disturbed on appeal where the offender has demonstrated a consistent incapacity to benefit from parole.