High Court of Australia
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
GLEESON CJ,
GUMMOW, KIRBY, HEYDON AND CRENNAN JJ
JASON CHARLES BUCKLEY APPELLANT
AND
THE QUEEN RESPONDENT
Buckley v The Queen
[2006] HCA 7
8 March 2006
B86/2005
ORDER
1. Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside the orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland made on 7 May 2004. 3. Remit the matter to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland for further consideration in accordance with the reasons of this Court.
On appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland
Representation:
P E Smith for the appellant (instructed by Terry Fisher & Company)
L J Clare for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland))
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.
CATCHWORDS
Buckley v The Queen
Criminal Law – Sentencing – Indefinite sentence – Appellant pleaded guilty to serious violent and sexual offences – Whether the sentencing judge observed the correct principles in exercising the power to impose an indefinite sentence.
Criminal Law – Sentencing – Whether the sentencing judge made material errors of fact requiring reconsideration of the sentencing discretion.
Penalties and Sentencing Act 1992 (Q), Pt 10.
1. GLEESON CJ, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HEYDON AND CRENNAN JJ. The appellant, having entered pleas of guilty to serious charges arising out of three violent attacks on women, was sentenced in the District Court of Queensland. An indefinite sentence was imposed, pursuant to s 163 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Q) ("the Act"). The principal issue in this appeal is whether, in imposing that sentence, the sentencing judge observed the principles to be applied in the exercise of the power conferred by such legislation. Those principles have been stated in a number of decisions, including decisions of this Court. A subsidiary issue is whether the sentencing judge made material errors of fact requiring reconsideration by the Court of Appeal of Queensland of the sentencing discretion.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate