Greenland v WA

[2017] WASCA 83

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 9AA
4. › Discount for plea of guilty
5. › Whether sentencing judge required to state head sentence before applying discounts
6. › Construction of s 9AA(5)
7. › Whether 'extent of the reduction' requires statement of head sentence
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 9AA
4. › Assessment of benefits resulting from plea
5. › Whether benefits to State and victims limited to benefits of not proving elements of offence
6. › Whether trial of issues relevant to assessment of benefits
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › Multiple offences of sexual penetration of child
5. › Whether total effective sentence of 5 years 6 months infringed first limb of totality principle
6. › Criminal Code (WA), s 321(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Trial of issues on aggravating factor of absence of consent
5. › Appellate review of factual finding
6. › Whether finding of absence of consent was open on the evidence
7. › Principles in M v The Queen applied by analogy

Quick Take

Section 9AA(5) of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) does not require a sentencing judge to expressly state the head sentence; stating the percentage discount suffices. The 'benefits resulting from the plea' under s 9AA(2) are to be assessed in light of all the circumstances, including the fact that a trial of issues required the complainant and other witnesses to give evidence. The principles governing appellate review of factual findings from M v The Queen apply by analogy to review of findings made at a trial of issues on sentencing.