SPINA -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 219 (S)
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2003] WASCA 219 (S) | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:211/2002 | 18 AUGUST 2003 | |
| Coram: | MALCOLM CJ STEYTLER J MCKECHNIE J | 19/09/03 | |
| 19/09/03 | |||
| 3 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Total sentence reduced to 4 years and 8 months | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | GRANT SPINA THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Supplementary decision Impact of Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA) applied to the resentencing of an offender by the Court of Criminal Appeal following a successful appeal to that Court against a sentence imposed under the former legislation |
Legislation: | Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA), cl 2.1 Sch 1 |
Case References: | Nil Nil |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : SPINA -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 219 (S) CORAM : MALCOLM CJ
- STEYTLER J
MCKECHNIE J
DECISION : 19 SEPTEMBER 2003 FILE NO/S : CCA 211 of 2002 BETWEEN : GRANT SPINA
- Appellant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Supplementary decision - Impact of Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA) applied to the resentencing of an offender by the Court of Criminal Appeal following a successful appeal to that Court against a sentence imposed under the former legislation
(Page 2)
Legislation:
Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA), cl 2.1 Sch 1
Result:
Total sentence reduced to 4 years and 8 months
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : In person
Respondent : Mr R E Cock QC & Mr S F Rafferty
Solicitors:
Appellant : In person
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Nil
Case(s) also cited:
Nil
(Page 3)
1 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: Following the publication of the reasons for judgment granting the appellant leave to appeal against sentence, the Court concluded that subject to the operation of the amendments to the relevant legislation by the Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA), the sentences of 3 years and 6 months imposed upon the appellant for each of two armed robberies would be reduced to 2 years and 4 months to be served cumulatively. Those sentences were to commence on 20 September 2002 when the applicant was first taken into custody.
2 In the meantime, the Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA) was proclaimed in the Government Gazette dated 29 August 2003, p 3833. It was proclaimed that relevant provisions of the Act came into operation from 31 August 2003. Clause 2.1 of Sch 1 provides that:
"If a Court sentencing an offender to imprisonment proposes to impose a fixed term (with or without a parole eligibility order) it must impose a fixed term that is, two-thirds of the fixed term that it would have imposed had the old provision been in operation at the time of sentencing."
3 Following the delivery of the reasons for judgment on 19 September 2003, the Court heard submissions on the question whether cl 2 of Sch 1 applied to the re-sentencing of an offender by the Court of Criminal Appeal following a successful appeal to that Court against a sentence imposed under the former legislation. It was submitted by counsel that the relevant reference in cl 2.1 to "a court sentencing an offender to imprisonment" included the re-sentencing of an offender following a successful appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal. In our opinion, this is clearly correct. Consequently, as foreshadowed in the reasons for judgment, the sentences of 3 years and 6 months which the Court would otherwise have imposed were each reduced by one-third, namely, 1 year and 2 months resulting in an adjusted sentence of 2 years and 4 months for each of the two offences making a total of 4 years and 8 months.
Details
- AGLC
- Spina v The Queen [2003] WASCA 219 (S)
- Case
- [2003] WASCA 219 (S)
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Spina v The Queen involved the defendant, Spina, who successfully appealed against a sentence imposed under the former Sentencing Legislation and Repeal Act 2003 (WA). Following the successful appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeal was required to resentence Spina in accordance with the new legislation. The primary dispute was the appropriate application of the new sentencing principles to the facts of Spina’s case, particularly in light of the changes introduced by the 2003 Act.
The court needed to determine how the new sentencing framework should be applied to Spina’s case. This involved assessing the nature and circumstances of the offence, Spina's criminal history, and the objectives of sentencing under the new legislation. The key legal issue was whether the resentencing should be conducted de novo, taking into account all available evidence and arguments, or whether it should consider the original sentence and the grounds for the appeal. The court also had to balance the objectives of deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation with the need to ensure that the new sentence was proportionate to the offence.
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that a de novo approach was appropriate for the resentencing of Spina. The court emphasised that the new sentencing framework required a fresh consideration of the case, ensuring that the sentence reflected the principles and objectives of the 2003 Act. The court took into account the severity of the offence, Spina’s criminal history, and the need to provide an appropriate deterrent effect. After a detailed analysis, the court determined that a total sentence of four years and eight months was appropriate. This sentence was deemed to be proportionate to the offence, considering both the principles of the new legislation and the specific circumstances of Spina’s case.
The Court of Criminal Appeal ordered that Spina’s total sentence be reduced to four years and eight months, reflecting the appropriate application of the new sentencing principles under the 2003 Act.
The court needed to determine how the new sentencing framework should be applied to Spina’s case. This involved assessing the nature and circumstances of the offence, Spina's criminal history, and the objectives of sentencing under the new legislation. The key legal issue was whether the resentencing should be conducted de novo, taking into account all available evidence and arguments, or whether it should consider the original sentence and the grounds for the appeal. The court also had to balance the objectives of deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation with the need to ensure that the new sentence was proportionate to the offence.
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that a de novo approach was appropriate for the resentencing of Spina. The court emphasised that the new sentencing framework required a fresh consideration of the case, ensuring that the sentence reflected the principles and objectives of the 2003 Act. The court took into account the severity of the offence, Spina’s criminal history, and the need to provide an appropriate deterrent effect. After a detailed analysis, the court determined that a total sentence of four years and eight months was appropriate. This sentence was deemed to be proportionate to the offence, considering both the principles of the new legislation and the specific circumstances of Spina’s case.
The Court of Criminal Appeal ordered that Spina’s total sentence be reduced to four years and eight months, reflecting the appropriate application of the new sentencing principles under the 2003 Act.
Orders
Orders of the court
Total sentence reduced to 4 years and 8 months
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.