Barbaro v The Queen

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,HAYNE, KIEFEL, BELL AND GAGELER JJMatter No M3/2013PASQUALE BARBARO  APPLICANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTMatter No M1/2013SAVERIO ZIRILLI  APPLICANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTBarbaro v The QueenZirilli v The Queen[2014] HCA 212 February 2014M3/2013 & M1/2013ORDERMatter No M3/20131.Special leave to appeal granted.2.Appeal treated as instituted, heard instanter and dismissed.Matter No M1/2013 1.Special leave to appeal granted.2.Appeal treated as instituted, heard instanter and dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of VictoriaRepresentationS J Odgers SC with T Kassimatis for the applicant in M3/2013 (instructed by Theo Magazis & Associates)B G Walmsley SC with F H Todd for the applicant in M1/2013 (instructed by Acquaro & Co) R J Bromwich SC with B M Young SC for the respondent in both matters (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth))G J C Silbert SC with B L Sonnet for the Director of Public Prosecutions (Victoria), intervening in both matters (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Vic))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSBarbaro v The Queen Zirilli v The QueenCriminal law – Sentence – Principles – Applicants pleaded guilty to offences against laws of Commonwealth after prosecution expressed views about available range of sentences that could be imposed on each applicant – Sentencing judge refused to receive submission from prosecution about available range of sentences – Whether duty of prosecution to make submission as to available range of sentences – Whether submission as to range amounts to submission of law – Whether...