← All Authorities
Australia uncategorised

The Queen v Kilic

(2016) 259 CLR 256
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2016
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Sentencing courts must use current sentencing practices as a yardstick; instinctive synthesis applies and a sentence may be manifestly excessive by departure from that range.

Key Principle

sentencing; current sentencing practices as yardstick; manifestly excessive; instinctive synthesis; Victorian approach

Area of Law

criminal

Related Cases

Pell v The Queen (2020) 268 CLR 123

Appellate court must itself assess whether jury verdict was unreasonable where unchallenged opportunity evidence raised reasonable doubt as to guilt.

Smethurst v Commissioner of Police (2020) 272 CLR 177

Search warrant executed at journalist's home held invalid for technical defects; High Court considered scope of implied freedom of political communication but declined to quash the warrant on that basis.

De Silva v The Queen (2019) 268 CLR 57

The High Court considered the Browne v Dunn rule and the appropriate jury directions when a party fails to cross-examine a witness on a matter it intends to contradict.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of The Queen v Kilic and how it applies to your situation.

Explain The Queen v Kilic