Holden v WA

[2009] WASCA 50

Western Australia 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. › Error of fact by sentencing judge
5. › Attribution of criminal responsibility for injuries beyond accepted plea
6. › Whether sentence manifestly excessive
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Factual basis for sentencing
4. › Acceptance of plea to lesser charge in full satisfaction of indictment
5. › Whether sentencing judge may attribute criminal responsibility for injuries constituting the more serious charge
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Pre-sentence reports
4. › Cross-examination of author of oral pre-sentence report
5. › Whether sentencing judge erred in refusing cross-examination
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Suspension of sentence
4. › Principles governing suspension
5. › Adequacy of submissions on appeal
6. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 39

Quick Take

Where the prosecution accepts a plea to a lesser charge in full satisfaction of an indictment, the sentencing judge cannot attribute criminal responsibility for injuries that would constitute the more serious charge. The author of a pre-sentence report, whether oral or written, may be cross-examined in appropriate cases; a blanket rule precluding such cross-examination is not the law. The proper construction of cl 3A(3) and (4) of the Sentencing Legislation (Transitional Provisions) Amendment Act 2008 (WA) was left open.