Ryan v The Queen [1982] HCA 30

Ryan v The Queen [1982] HCA 30

Section 569(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) does not authorize the appellate court to increase sentences imposed on counts not the subject of appeal when convictions on other counts are quashed, especially where those counts are not properly joined or interrelated. The Court of Criminal Appeal erred by substituting higher sentences for counts of handling stolen goods, as the applicant had not appealed those convictions or sentences, and the propriety of conviction on those counts was not before the Court. The original sentences imposed by the trial judge on those counts should be restored, and no minimum term is to be fixed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Special Leave and Appeal
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'joinder of Counts' 'interpretation of Sentencing Powers' 'crimes Act 1958 (vic) S.569(1)']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'joinder of Counts' 'interpretation of Sentencing Powers' 'crimes Act 1958 (vic) S.569(1)']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Special Leave and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether s.569(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) empowers the appellate court to increase sentences on counts not appealed when another conviction is quashed' 'Whether sentences on separate counts can be increased where their joinder in the indictment was irregular' 'Interpretation and scope of s.569(1) Crimes Act']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 569(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) does not authorize the appellate court to increase sentences imposed on counts not the subject of appeal when convictions on other counts are quashed, especially where those counts are not properly joined or interrelated. The Court of Criminal Appeal erred by substituting higher sentences for counts of handling stolen goods, as the applicant had not appealed those convictions or sentences, and the propriety of conviction on those counts was not before the Court. The original sentences imposed by the trial judge on those counts should be restored, and no minimum term is to be fixed.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed.

Orders

  • ['Order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the State of Victoria varied by setting aside so much of that order as increased the sentences on counts 3, 4, 5 and 6 and as fixed the minimum period to be served by the applicant before becoming eligible for parole.' 'Restore the sentences imposed by the trial judge on...