South Australian Numbered Acts South Australian Numbered Acts9—Sentencing for offences under previous law
(1) A sentence imposed on a person, before the commencement of this section, in respect of an offence against section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935
(as in force before the commencement of section 6
of this Act) is taken to be, and always to have been, not affected by error or otherwise manifestly excessive merely because—
(a) the trial judge did not ask any question of the trier of fact directed to ascertaining which acts of sexual exploitation, or which particulars of the offence as alleged, the trier of fact found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt and the person was not sentenced on the view of the facts most favourable to the person; and
(b) the sentencing court sentenced the person consistently with the verdict of the trier of fact but having regard to the acts of sexual exploitation determined by the sentencing court to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
(2) Where, after the commencement of this section, a person is to be sentenced for an offence against section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935
(as in force before the commencement of section 6
of this Act) the following provisions apply:
(a) a verdict of guilt handed down by the trier of fact in relation to the offence is taken to be, and always to have been, a finding by the trier of fact that the person is guilty of the acts of sexual exploitation comprising the course of conduct alleged by the information;
(b) notwithstanding paragraph (a)
, in sentencing the person for the offence, the sentencing court may determine which alleged acts of sexual exploitation the sentencing court finds proved beyond a reasonable doubt and may disregard any acts of sexual exploitation that the sentencing court is not satisfied were proved beyond a reasonable doubt;
(c) for the avoidance of doubt, the sentencing court need not ask any question of the trier of fact directed to ascertaining which acts of sexual exploitation, or which particulars of the offence as alleged, the trier of fact found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt and, unless it has so determined in accordance with paragraph (b)
, need not sentence the person on the view of the facts most favourable to the person.
(3) This section does not apply in relation to the particular matter that was the subject of the determination in Chiro v The Queen [2017] HCA 37 (13 September 2017).
Note—
Except as provided in subsection (3)
, this section negates the effect of the determination of the High Court in Chiro v The Queen [2017] HCA 37 (13 September 2017).