imprisonment on multiple offences unless they are on the ‘founded same facts, or form, or are part of, a series of offences of the same or a similar character’. Further, when courts impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment, they must give reasons for doing so. The Council suggests that consideration should be given to conducting a review perhaps in two to three years’ time of the – – use of aggregate sentences in Victoria, with particular attention to the inclusion of guideline offences in aggregate sentences. Sentencing Commonwealth and state offences A further issue that emerged during consultation was how to reconcile the application of a staged sentencing process in an offence-based guideline with the application of Commonwealth law in cases with both state and Commonwealth offences. In 2016–17, approximately 1% of cases sentenced in Victoria included both state and Commonwealth offences in a single case: 831 of 86,050 cases in the Magistrates’ Court (1%) and 74 of 1,670 cases in the higher courts (4%) (Figure 1). Figure 1: with at least one state offence and at least one Commonwealth offence, Magistrates’ Court and higher courts, 2016–17 [Type of offences in Magistrates’ Court Higher Courts [number case] [number of cases] of with state offences 83,704 1,495 only Cases with Commonwealth 1,515 101 offences only Cases with both 831 74 Commonwealth and state offences In the cases involving both Commonwealth and state offences, courts must apply a hybrid of state and Commonwealth law in sentencing the offender, though the court is first and foremost a federal court in that process. Any state law that would be inconsistent with the proper application of Commonwealth law in the case is therefore not up’ and applied. Establishing ‘picked
imprisonment on multiple offences unless they are ‘founded on the same facts, or form, or are part of, a series of offences of the same or a similar character’. Further, when courts impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment, they must give reasons for doing so. The Council suggests that consideration should be given to conducting a review – perhaps in two to three years’ time – of the use of aggregate sentences in Victoria, with particular attention to the inclusion of guideline offences in aggregate sentences. Sentencing Commonwealth and state offences A further issue that emerged during consultation was how to reconcile the application of a staged sentencing process in an offence-based guideline with the application of Commonwealth law in cases with both state and Commonwealth offences. In 2016–17, approximately 1% of cases sentenced in Victoria included both state and Commonwealth offences in a single case: 831 of 86,050 cases in the Magistrates’ Court (1%) and 74 of 1,670 cases in the higher courts (4%) (Figure 1). Figure 1: with at least one state offence and at least one Commonwealth offence, Magistrates’ Court and higher courts, 2016–17 [Type of offences in case] Magistrates’ Court [number of cases] Higher Courts [number of with state offences only 83,704 1,495 Cases with Commonwealth offences only 1,515 101 Cases with both Commonwealth and state offences 831 74 In the cases involving both Commonwealth and state offences, courts must apply a hybrid of state and Commonwealth law in sentencing the offender, though the court is first and foremost a federal court in that process. Any state law that would be inconsistent with the proper application of Commonwealth law in the case is therefore not ‘picked up’ and applied. Establishing