Curry v WA

[2022] WASCA 36

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Discount for plea of guilty
5. › Whether plea entered at first reasonable opportunity
6. › Whether strategic delay in pleading guilty while pursuing negotiations renders delay reasonable
7. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 9AA
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Discount for plea of guilty
5. › Compulsory case conference
6. › Whether indication given at compulsory case conference can control sentencing judge's discretion
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), s 137(3)(a)(i)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Totality principle
5. › First limb
6. › Whether prior sentence being served on parole at time of offending must be taken into account
7. › Whether commission of offences while on parole negates assumptions underlying totality principle
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Irrelevant considerations
5. › Whether weapons possessed by criminal enterprise relevant to seriousness of drug offending
6. › Whether sentencing judge's observations about offender's charm constituted taking into account irrelevant consideration

Quick Take

For the purposes of s 9AA of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), the strategic advantage to an offender in delaying a plea of guilty while pursuing negotiations as to other counts does not render the delay reasonable, and the first reasonable opportunity to plead guilty to individual counts is assessed by reference to each count separately. Nothing said at a compulsory case conference can control the sentencing judge's discretion. Where an offence is committed while on parole towards the end of a prior sentence, the totality principle has very limited application because the commission of offences on parole may negate assumptions of rehabilitation and reduced retribution that underpin the principle.