Brett Andrew Green v The Queen & Shane Darrin Quinn v The Queen: Allowing one appeal against a sentence created unacceptable disparity

Brett Andrew Green v The Queen & Shane Darrin Quinn v The Queen: Allowing one appeal against a sentence created unacceptable disparity

The High Court today published its reasons in the matter of Brett Andrew Green v The Queen & Shane Darrin Quinn v The Queen [2011] HCA 49, ruling that NSW Court of Criminal Appeal's decision to allow the crown appeal against two co-offenders but not a third created an unacceptable disparity in the sentences between the co-offenders, thus allowing the appeal.

The appellants, who plead guilty to offences under section 23(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) were sentenced to three, six and four years imprisonment.

Under section 5D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), the primary purpose of Crown appeals is to "to lay down principles for the governance and guidance of courts having the duty of sentencing convicted persons."

Under section 5D, the Court of Criminal Appeal also has jurisdiction to decline to allow an appeal against a sentence, even if the sentence is erroneously lenient. The High Court ruled that given the disparity in sentences that would have eventuated from a successful appeal, the Court of Criminal of Appeal should have dismissed the appeals.

If you liked the content of this blog, get our integrated LawOne service, the only one stop shop, for a special extended 6 week period for our Christmas Gift Promotion. Simply like us on Facebook and fill out your details here.