Site Logo

R v Russell [2021] QCA 35

The offender was sentenced after pleading guilty to 37 counts of obtaining financial advantage by deception contrary to s 134.2 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, and 3 counts of attempting to obtain a financial advantage by deception contrary to the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Original sentence imposed 3 years and 6 months imprisonment with an 18 month non-parole period. Offender appealed on the basis that sentencing judge misapplied and failed to give the totality principle sufficient and therefore rendered the sentence manifestly excessive.  

Totality: Totality principle is designed to ensure that offender is not unjustly burdened by being required to serve an aggregate term of imprisonment more severe than may fairly considered to be merited by totality of offender’s criminality. Offender did not serve full custodial component of previous sentence, but spent entire period of custody under previous sentence either in custody or in the community. The sentencing judge took into account the known length of the period the offender was in custody in consequence of the imposition of the previous sentence.  The sentencing judge however was not obliged to moderate the sentence upon the false premise that the offender had served 18 rather than 12 months in custody under the previous sentence.  

Leave to appeal not granted. Appeal dismissed.
The CSD acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as First Australians and recognises their culture, history, diversity and their deep connection to the land. We acknowledge that we are on the land of the traditional owners and pay respects to Elders past and present.

© 2023 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions