14 May 2020
Leave to appeal refused because the sentencing judge correctly applied established authorities in fixing the starting point and enhancement, gave a generous 41% discount for plea and cooperation, and no error of law or discretion was shown that would justify appellate intervention.
8 Nov 2019
Given the nature of the assistance (mere tip-offs), the applicant's role as a paid informer for two matters, her ongoing participation in drug activity shortly after providing intelligence, and the outcome of the information, the 3 month reduction (resulting in a 35% overall discount) was within an acceptable range and not so inadequate as to found a reasonably arguable appeal; leave refused.
22 Mar 2007
There is no categorical bar to recognising pre-arrest assistance in mitigation of sentence; sentencing courts must evaluate the circumstances and may grant a reduction according to the assistance's nature, extent and reliability. On the facts the appellant's pre-arrest assistance warranted a reduction of sentence from five and a half years to five years.