R v Budd

[2012] QCA 120

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Grounds for interference
5. › Sentence manifestly excessive or inadequate
6. › Whether sentence of imprisonment manifestly excessive for drug supply and production offences
7. › Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Imprisonment as last resort
4. › Whether sentencing judge erred in not giving sufficient weight to imprisonment being a last resort
5. › Drug addiction as mitigating factor
6. › Offending while on bail as aggravating factor
7. › Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9(2)(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Parity principle
4. › Co-offenders with different levels of culpability
5. › Whether parity principle improperly applied to require imprisonment
6. › Whether sentencing judge required to conduct assessment ensuring due proportion among all sentences

Quick Take

The principle that imprisonment should only be imposed as a last resort under s 9(2)(a) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) is but one of many matters to which a sentencing judge must have regard, and does not preclude imprisonment where the totality of circumstances — including the number of offences, offending while on bail, and the prevalence of the offence — warrants it, even where the offender's drug addiction underpins the offending. The parity principle does not require that all co-offenders receive the same type of sentence; it allows for different sentences reflecting different degrees of culpability.