Hamilton v The Queen [2001] FCA 44

Hamilton v The Queen [2001] FCA 44

There was no error in principle in the sentencing; the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range for the seriousness of the offence, and any minor factual error could only have operated in the appellant's favour.

Parties
Appellant: Sandra Louise Hamilton; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Arson, Sentencing, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Arson Sentencing Appeal Against 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandra Louise Hamilton

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for arson was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether there was any error in the sentencing process

Ratio Decidendi

There was no error in principle in the sentencing; the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range for the seriousness of the offence, and any minor factual error could only have operated in the appellant's favour.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.