Tanner v WA

[2013] WASCA 142

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Summing up
5. › Whether trial judge failed fairly or adequately to address defence case
6. › Whether statements in summing up unsupported by evidence
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), s 112
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Directions to jury
5. › Evidence of drug use by accused
6. › Whether direction required that evidence more prejudicial than probative
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Bias
5. › Comments by trial judge in presence of jury panel
6. › Whether reasonable apprehension of bias
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Sentencing process
5. › Procedural fairness
6. › Whether sentencing judge imposed sentence based on material not disclosed in open court
7. › Research and statistics not provided to parties
8. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 15

Quick Take

Section 15 of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) does not authorise a sentencing judge to take into account research or data obtained without reference to the parties and without giving them an opportunity to be heard. A sentencing judge applying the parity principle must do so by reference to the findings of fact made by the judge who sentenced the co-offender, and cannot go behind those findings. Findings as to an offender's precise position in a drug distribution hierarchy must be supported by evidence to the beyond reasonable doubt standard and cannot be based on speculation.