28 Jan 2000
The Court dismissed the appeal: the trial judge properly exercised sentencing discretion, the departure from the usual three-year starting point for burglary was justified by the circumstances, the consecutive sentences were appropriate, and the court ordered that three months of pre-sentence custody not count towards the sentence.
2 Feb 1999
Convictions were upheld because the trial judge's acceptance of police evidence and rejection of the applicant's account rendered the prosecution case overwhelming; the sentences were within the judge's discretion and not manifestly excessive, therefore the appeals against conviction and sentence were dismissed.
3 Sept 1996
Leave to appeal was refused because the imposed sentences (3 years on robbery counts to run concurrently and 1 year on the immigration count to run consecutively, total 4 years) were not excessive nor wrong in principle; the applicant's personal hardships did not justify interference.