11 Oct 2018
The established tariff of 15 months' imprisonment after a plea applies to offences under section 38AA(1)(b), and the appellant's economic and family circumstances did not constitute humanitarian grounds to depart from that tariff.
22 Feb 2017
The appeal was dismissed because the Magistrate lawfully found PW1's identification evidence reliable and that it gave rise to the only reasonable and irresistible inference that the appellant was selling T-shirts and had established a business in breach of s38AA; exclusion of the interview did not prevent proof beyond reasonable doubt; the sentence was appropriate and consistent with the Usman Butt tariff.
22 Sept 2016
The application for leave to appeal out of time is dismissed because the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the nearly two year delay; additionally the proposed grounds were not substantial as the sentence (starting point 18 years, +1 year for international element, reduced by one third for plea to 13 years) was within permissible discretion and not manifestly excessive; post-sentence participation in an anti-drug campaign is a matter generally for the executive, not for the Court of Appeal to reward.
5 Feb 2016
The applicant failed to prove that the post‑sentence information led to enforcement outcomes attributable to him and the sentencing judge had correctly applied the relevant tariffs and afforded the maximum customary reduction for assistance; accordingly there was no basis to disturb the sentence and the application was dismissed.
7 May 2015
The judge correctly applied the established sentencing tariff by adopting a 9‑year starting point for the quantity involved and properly allowed a one‑third reduction for the guilty plea, producing a 6‑year sentence; no arguable error was demonstrated and leave to appeal was refused.
31 Jul 2012
Leave to appeal was refused because the sentencing judge properly applied established sentencing principles: the 2½ year tariff for non-domestic burglary was appropriate given the circumstances including prior convictions and breach of trust, the judge was not required to enhance the starting point, and the applicant's family mitigation did not render the sentence excessive.
9 Feb 2012
The Court held that the 15-month tariff for this offence is appropriate; the Magistrate properly applied a 3-month reduction to account for 44 days pre-sentence custody resulting in an effective 12-month term; humanitarian factors and remorse did not justify further reduction; therefore the sentence of 12 months is not wrong in principle or manifestly excessive and the appeal is dismissed.
28 Jul 2011
Given the offender's status as a professional/serial burglar with multiple aggravating features (sophisticated planning and tools, international conspiracy, very high value of stolen property, prior similar convictions and substantial property damage) the tariff starting points were inadequate; the Court increased the starting points (burglary to 3 years => 28 months after one-third guilty plea discount; conspiracy to steal to 5 years => 40 months after discount) and ordered appropriate consecutive portions so the aggregate sentence of 68 months imprisonment reflected the gravity of the offen…
3 Jun 2009
Applicant chose to go to trial and thus forfeited the usual one third guilty plea reduction; the imposed sentence of 8 years was consistent with the applicable tariff for 27.68 grams of methamphetamine and there was no mitigation to justify a reduction, therefore the application for leave to appeal the sentence was dismissed.
18 Mar 2008
Given the quantity of drug close to the upper limit of the 10–50g bracket, the aggravating effect of importation and the applicant's significant prior convictions, a starting point of 8 years was justified and a full one-third discount for the guilty plea produced an appropriate sentence; the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.