Munda v Western Australia

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,HAYNE, CRENNAN, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND KEANE JJERNEST MUNDA  APPELLANTANDTHE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA  RESPONDENTMunda v Western Australia[2013] HCA 382 October 2013P34/2013ORDERAppeal dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western AustraliaRepresentationA Boe with D D Brunello for the appellant (instructed by Aboriginal Legal Service of Western Australia (Inc))J McGrath SC with L M Fox for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions)Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSMunda v Western AustraliaCriminal law – Appeal – Prosecution appeal against sentence – Where appellant pleaded guilty to manslaughter of de facto spouse – Where appellate court resentenced appellant on ground that original sentence manifestly inadequate – Whether appellate court failed to correctly apply principles attending disposition of prosecution appeal against sentence on ground of manifest inadequacy – Whether finding of manifest inadequacy open if similar sentences imposed for comparable offences – Whether appellate court erred in failing to exercise residual discretion.Criminal law – Sentence – Principles – Relevance of deprived background of Aboriginal offender – Whether appellate court gave appropriate regard to appellant's antecedents and personal circumstances. Words and phrases – "aggravating factors", "antecedents and personal circumstances", "manifestly inadequate", "mitigating factors", "residual discretion", "social disadvantage".Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), ss 24(1), 31, 41(4).Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), ss 6, 8(1). FRENCH CJ, HAYNE, CRENNAN, KIEFEL, GAGELER AND KEANE JJ. The appellant was convicted on his plea of guilty to the manslaughter of his...