Sentencing remarks made by a judge when imposing a non-custodial order (such as an intensive supervision order) indicating what term of imprisonment might otherwise have been imposed are not binding on a subsequent sentencing judge dealing with breach of that order, particularly where the offender's history has materially changed. Offences of attempted armed robbery and armed robbery committed at different premises on the same day are not 'one transaction' for the purposes of accumulation. Section 87 of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) requires active consideration of credit for time spent in custody on remand.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.