High Court of Australia

Bui v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) [2012] HCA 1

244 CLR 638; 86 ALJR 208; 284 ALR 445

9 Feb 2012

Case Number: M127/2011


French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Kiefel, Bell JJ


Criminal law – Appeal - Appeal against sentence - Prosecution appeal - Double jeopardy - Appellant pleaded guilty to importation of a marketable quantity of a border controlled drug contrary to s 307. 2(1) of Criminal Code (Cth) - Appellant sentenced to three years' imprisonment to be released forthwith upon giving security to comply with a condition that appellant be of good behaviour for three years - Respondent appealed against sentence - Sections 289(2) and 290(3) of Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) ("Victorian provisions") provided that double jeopardy not to be taken into account in allowing appeal against sentence or imposing sentence - Whether ss 68(1) or 79(1) of Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ("Judiciary Act") rendered Victorian provisions applicable to prosecution appeal against sentence instituted by respondent - Whether a "common law principle against double jeopardy" picked up by s 80 of Judiciary Act - Whether ss 16A(1)-(2) of Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) required or permitted court determining sentence for federal offence to take into account double jeopardy.

Words and phrases – "double jeopardy".

Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) – ss 16A(1)-(2).

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – ss 68(1)-(2), 79(1), 80.

Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) – ss 289(2), 290(3).


PDF MD5: 73488bb61cd4e3f6a0af46e23a80f5fa
RTF MD5: e0d12fb5ac2695a81ff0c3131769f07e