Betts v The Queen

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND GORDON JJJOEL BETTS  APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTBetts v The Queen[2016] HCA 2515 June 2016S281/2015ORDERAppeal dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South WalesRepresentationS J Odgers SC with P D Lange for the appellant (instructed by Murphy's Lawyers)L A Babb SC with N L Williams for the respondent (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSBetts v The QueenCriminal law – Sentencing – Where appellant appealed against severity of sentences – Where additional material produced by appellant admitted on "usual basis" that it may be taken into account if appellate court came to re-sentence – Where additional material contained evidence inconsistent with appellant's case at sentence hearing – Where appellate court found error, engaged in re‑sentencing appellant and refused to take into account additional material – Whether miscarriage of justice occasioned. Words and phrases – "fresh evidence", "miscarriage of justice", "power of remittal", "re-sentencing discretion", "supplemental powers", "usual basis".Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5(1)(c), 6(3), 12.FRENCH CJ, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND GORDON JJ.   This appeal is concerned with the exercise of the appellate court's sentencing discretion under the common form criminal appeal provisions.  Is the appellate court's assessment of whether some other sentence is warranted in law made on the evidence that was before the sentencing court, or does the exercise of the sentencing discretion afresh[1] require a hearing de novo at...