13 May 2022
The sentencing judge correctly balanced the appellant's youth and mitigation against the gravity of unlicensed and uninsured driving on a major expressway; custodial detention at a labour training centre and a 12‑month driving disqualification were proportionate and not manifestly excessive, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
25 Apr 2019
Leave to appeal was granted because it was reasonably arguable that the sentencing judge adopted a starting point that was manifestly excessive and wrong in principle in this case; legal aid for the appeal was granted under Rule 12(3) Cap 221D.
26 Aug 2015
There was a reasonable argument that the aggregate effect of (i) a marginally high starting point for 11.4g of cocaine, (ii) an additional 3 months for offending while on police bail, and (iii) ordering the resulting sentence after plea to run fully consecutively to an existing sentence might render the overall sentence manifestly excessive; accordingly leave to appeal against sentence was granted and legal aid provided for the appeal.
27 Jun 2014
Leave to appeal out of time was granted and leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was granted because the applicant raised an arguable ground that the trial in his absence, without legal representation and without full arraignment, may have compromised fairness under the principles in R v Hayward and R v Jones; additionally the sentence was arguably manifestly excessive on its face given the circumstances and precedents.
20 Feb 2013
The appeal is dismissed because the offence involved a degree of planning and force, the magistrate reasonably set a 9‑month starting point and properly reduced it by one‑third for the guilty plea, making the 6‑month sentence not manifestly excessive.
30 Jul 2010
Given the appellant's aggressive, abusive and obstructive conduct, the insufficiency of mitigating factors as assessed in the CSO report, and the need to protect police and deter similar conduct, a starting point of six weeks with a two-week plea discount producing a four-week immediate custodial sentence was appropriate and not manifestly excessive; the appeal is dismissed.
27 Apr 2006
The Court upheld the Magistrate's sentencing exercise: the starting point of nine months per charge, reduced by one-third for guilty pleas to six months and ordered to run concurrently, was not manifestly excessive given the aggravating factors and the DATC assessment, and therefore the appeals against sentence were dismissed.
24 Aug 2004
The Court found that while the five year aggregate sentence was not in principle manifestly excessive given the professional character of the burglaries and the applicant's record, fairness required adjustment because the offences overlapped temporally with another sentence recently served and the DNA processing delay; accordingly the sentence on charge 2 was set aside and substituted with 4 years 4 months, and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently, producing an effective reduction of eight months.
16 Feb 1995
The magistrate properly identified and weighed aggravating features (a pre‑planned assault and trapping the complainant in a lift); those factors justified the six month imprisonment and the sentence was not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle, so the appeal was dismissed.
9 Jan 1976
Conviction was upheld because the evidence showed possession and the defence of fabrication was unsupported; sentencing was reduced because two years, though within the statutory maximum, was manifestly excessive in the circumstances and substituted with one year.