When sentencing an accessory before the fact to armed robbery, the sentencing judge must apply parity and proportionality principles by comparing the sentence with those imposed on co-offenders, including juvenile co-offenders sentenced in the District Court. There is no inflexible rule precluding comparison with a juvenile co-offender's sentence. A causal connection between depression and the commission of the offence must be established by medical or psychological evidence; the offender's own statement that the offence was committed to finance a drug habit is insufficient. Compliance with the obligation to answer questions on oath at a sentencing hearing does not constitute assistance to authorities under s 23 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.