Tregonning, A.D. v. The Queen [1985] FCA 14

Tregonning, A.D. v. The Queen [1985] FCA 14

The sentencing judge erred in taking into account possible automatic remissions when fixing the non-parole period, leading to an excessive non-parole period. The head sentence of five years is appropriate, but the non-parole period should be reduced to two years.

Parties
Appellant: Andrew David Tregonning; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 1985
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence
Outcome
Sentence of five years imprisonment confirmed. Non-parole period reduced to two years. Appeal allowed to this extent.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Non Parole Period, Robbery With Violence, Appeal From Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Non Parole Period Robbery With Violence Appeal From Sentence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew David Tregonning

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the sentence, and the non-parole period imposed on the appellant, excessive?
  2. 2 Did the sentencing judge err in consideration of deterrence and the appellant's subjective circumstances, including medical history and rehabilitation prospects?
  3. 3 Did the judge err by taking into account possible remissions under the Probation and Parole Act and Regulations when fixing the non-parole period?

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in taking into account possible automatic remissions when fixing the non-parole period, leading to an excessive non-parole period. The head sentence of five years is appropriate, but the non-parole period should be reduced to two years.

Court Disposition

Sentence of five years imprisonment confirmed. Non-parole period reduced to two years. Appeal allowed to this extent.

Orders

  • The sentence of five years imprisonment be confirmed.
  • The non-parole period ordered by the trial judge be set aside and in lieu thereof the appellant serve a non-parole period of two years.