Ugle v WA

[2018] WASCA 97

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Discount for guilty plea
4. › Plea at first reasonable opportunity
5. › Assessment of appropriate discount
6. › Relevance of strength of prosecution case
7. › Whether 10% discount unreasonable or plainly unjust where prosecution case not overwhelming
8. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 9AA
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Appellate review of sentencing discretion
5. › Whether error inferred from unreasonable or plainly unjust result
6. › House v The King standard
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Whether sentencing judge required to alert counsel before departing from uncontested submission on discount
5. › Whether failure to raise issue with counsel constitutes denial of procedural fairness
1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Resentencing on appeal
4. › Court's obligation to consider whole sentencing decision afresh
5. › Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 31(4)(a)

Quick Take

Where an offender pleads guilty at the first reasonable opportunity and the prosecution case is not overwhelming, a discount significantly below 25% under s 9AA of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) is likely to be unreasonable or plainly unjust. Even where the prosecution case is strong, the purpose of s 9AA — to encourage early guilty pleas — requires that discounts not be so parsimonious as to discourage others from pleading guilty. A sentencing judge is not required to alert counsel before departing from an uncontested submission on the level of discount, provided the issue was one counsel should have anticipated, but it is good practice to do so.