13 Mar 2013
For a habitual offender the court may raise the sentencing starting point for the current offence to reflect persistent reoffending and the need for deterrence and public protection, while remaining proportionate; a guilty plea warrants a discount — applying a 9‑month starting point with a 3‑month reduction produced a non‑excessive 6‑month sentence.
14 Jan 2003
The Magistrate was entitled to adopt a 9 month starting point given the appellant's status as a habitual offender who stole items for resale; after allowing a one‑third discount for a guilty plea the 6 month imprisonment sentence was lawful and not disproportionate, and is therefore confirmed.
28 Feb 2001
The trial judge was entitled to adopt a higher starting point (four years) because the offences involved two premises, significant damage and high value thefts, and the defendants were professional, habitual burglars whose previous convictions showed deterrence had failed; a full one‑third guilty plea discount was applied and the resulting concurrent sentences of 32 months were not manifestly excessive, so leave to appeal was refused.
6 Oct 1995
The trial judge correctly applied credit for the guilty plea and the totality principle; an overall sentence of four years for the three burglaries was not excessive in light of the applicant's habitual offender record, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
19 Sept 1989
The 18-month sentence was manifestly excessive in light of the established tariff authorities and the respondent's concession; the appropriate sentence is 12 months' imprisonment, so the appeal is allowed to that extent and the original sentence is quashed and substituted.
11 May 1973
The appellate court allowed a limited reduction of the drug sentence from nine to six months because the Intake Officer's report and the appellant's apparent assurance to desist from drugs constituted sufficient mitigation and prospect of reform to justify a discretionary reduction despite the appellant's prior convictions.