Brewer v Bayens

(2002) 127 A Crim R 189; [2002] WASCA 37

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Spent conviction orders
4. › Discretion to make spent conviction order
5. › Whether seriousness of offence is categorical bar
6. › Whether public interest considerations militate against order
7. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 39(2), s 45
8. › Spent Convictions Act 1988 (WA), ss 6, 7
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Public soliciting of a prostitute
4. › Relevance of general deterrence to spent conviction order
5. › Prostitution Act 2000 (WA), s 5(1)
1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Appellate review of discretionary sentencing decision
5. › Principles in House v The King
6. › Whether error of law disclosed in magistrate's reasons
7. › Justices Act 1902 (WA), s 196(1)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Fresh evidence on appeal
4. › Discretion to admit further evidence on sentencing appeal
5. › Justices Act 1902 (WA), s 196(1)(b)

Quick Take

The seriousness of an offence is a relevant discretionary factor in determining whether to make a spent conviction order under s 45 of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), and may be a very weighty factor, but it is not a general disqualifying factor that categorically prevents the making of such an order. Where the offender's work involves contact with vulnerable persons, the public interest in relevant institutions having access to conviction information is a legitimate countervailing consideration.