Smith v WA

[2019] WASCA 7

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Aggravated attempted murder
5. › Mandatory minimum penalty
6. › Whether sentencing judge erred in imposing minimum rather than maximum penalty
7. › Whether sentencing judge required to give reasons for not imposing life imprisonment
8. › Criminal Code (WA), s 283(1)(a), s 283(2)
9. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 9, s 9AA, s 41(2a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Parole
4. › Relevance of parole regime to sentencing
5. › Whether possibility of parole release is a relevant sentencing consideration
6. › Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), s 25
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Discount for guilty plea
4. › Whether 15% discount was unreasonable or plainly unjust
5. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 9AA
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Manifest excess
4. › Whether sentence at mandatory minimum can be manifestly excessive
5. › Whether offender can contend sentence is excessive because maximum penalty was not imposed

Quick Take

The possibility of parole release is irrelevant to the sentencing process for aggravated attempted murder under s 283 of the Criminal Code (WA), and a sentencing judge is not required to give detailed reasons for imposing the mandatory minimum rather than the maximum penalty of life imprisonment. An argument that a sentence is manifestly excessive because the maximum penalty was not imposed is not reasonably arguable.