Ballantyne v The Queen

[2020] VSCA 115

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Sentence
4. › Manifestly excessive sentence
5. › Non-parole period
6. › Whether non-parole period manifestly excessive
7. › Whether sentencing judge erred in finding complete absence of remorse
8. › Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), s 5(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Remorse
4. › Assessment of remorse
5. › Whether early guilty plea and psychological evidence of insight constituted evidence of remorse
6. › Whether claim of amnesia traversed guilty plea
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Non-parole period
4. › Purpose and principles
5. › Rehabilitation through conditional freedom
6. › Discrete consideration of factors bearing on eligibility for parole
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Current sentencing practices
4. › Whether current sentencing practices set quantitative boundaries on sentence
5. › Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), s 5(2)(b)

Quick Take

A sentencing judge's categorical finding of no remorse may be erroneous where the offender entered early guilty pleas and a psychologist's report indicates insight and commitment to reform. A claim of amnesia regarding the offending does not traverse a guilty plea. These factors bear particularly on the fixing of the non-parole period.