R v Alibasic & Salajdjiza; ex parte Cth DPP

[2005] QCA 108

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Crown appeal to increase sentence
5. › Whether sentencing judge erred in applying sentencing guideline
6. › Whether sentence manifestly inadequate
7. › Excise Act 1901 (Cth), s 117D
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Sentencing guidelines
4. › Temporal application of appellate sentencing guidance
5. › Whether guideline judgment applies only to offences committed after date of guideline or to all future sentencing occasions
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Commonwealth offences
4. › Excise offences
5. › Unlawful movement of tobacco leaf
6. › Appropriate range of sentence
7. › Relevance of amount of excise duty avoided
8. › Excise Act 1901 (Cth), ss 44, 117D

Quick Take

The sentencing guidance in R v Kopa regarding minimum periods of actual custody for excise offences under s 117D of the Excise Act 1901 (Cth) applies to all sentencing occasions after the date of that decision, regardless of when the offence was committed. Appellate sentencing guidance is not to be treated as a legislative pronouncement subject to a presumption against retrospectivity. For excise offences involving avoidance of more than $500,000, a minimum of four to six months actual custody is ordinarily required.