R v Creighton

[2011] ACTCA 13

ACT Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Crown appeal
4. › Manifest inadequacy
5. › Whether sentence manifestly inadequate
6. › Whether sentence would shock the public conscience
7. › Sentence light but not manifestly inadequate
1. Appeal
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Crown appeal
4. › Principles for Crown appeals
5. › Double jeopardy
6. › Effect of respondent having served full-time custody component
7. › Reluctance to return offender to full-time custody
1. Appeal
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Crown appeal
4. › Role of appeal court
5. › Obligation to identify error
6. › Whether appeal court should substitute its opinion for sentencing judge
7. › Whether guidance on sentencing ranges appropriate
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Culpable driving causing death and grievous bodily harm
4. › Periodic detention
5. › Whether periodic detention addresses general deterrence
6. › Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), ss 29(2), 29(4)

Quick Take

A sentence of imprisonment served by way of periodic detention is capable of addressing general deterrence, particularly for offences commonly committed by persons of otherwise good character. Cross-jurisdictional sentencing comparisons are inappropriate where maximum penalties differ significantly. On a Crown appeal, the DPP must provide adequate analysis of sentencing ranges within the relevant jurisdiction rather than relying on mathematical comparisons with other jurisdictions.