Figura v DPP

[2025] ACTCA 48

ACT Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug and Alcohol Treatment Orders
4. › Cancellation of DATO
5. › Whether to impose suspended sentence or resentence
6. › Relevance of extent of compliance with DATO
7. › Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), ss 12A, 80W, 80ZE, 80ZH
1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Manifest excess
5. › Whether sentence unreasonable or plainly unjust
6. › Scope of appellate review of sentencing discretion
1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Resentencing on appeal
4. › Whether error in sentencing enlivens duty to resentence
5. › Whether error must have capacity to operate to prejudice of appellant
6. › Error operating in favour of appellant

Quick Take

In the ACT, an error in sentencing that operates only in the appellant's favour does not enliven the duty to resentence on appeal; the error must have had the capacity to operate to the prejudice of the appellant. When a DATO is cancelled under s 80ZE(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), only the part of the sentence that was suspended under the custodial part of the treatment order should be imposed, not the whole original sentence. Non-compliance with a DATO, particularly early non-compliance, will generally support imposition of the suspended sentence rather than resentencing.