The stricter requirement for an adequate explanation for delay in extension of time applications (from Attorney-General (Qld) v Adair and R v Gordon) applies to Crown applications to increase sentence where double jeopardy considerations arise, but does not apply with the same force to applications by sentenced persons. For sentenced persons, even without a satisfactory explanation for delay, an extension may be granted if refusal would result in a miscarriage of justice. A sentence of five years' imprisonment with one-third parole eligibility for commercial possession of approximately 25 grams of pure methylamphetamine on two occasions, with relevant criminal history and offending on bail, is within the appropriate sentencing range.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.