Where a sentencing judge finds special circumstances for the purpose of extending the parole period, the accumulation of sentences must be structured so as to give effect to that finding; if the accumulation produces a non-parole period at approximately the statutory default ratio, that demonstrates sentencing error. Parity of sentencing between co-offenders cannot be assessed by mathematically averaging multiple sentences to derive a per-offence tariff. Protective custody, because of its more onerous conditions, justifies reduction in both head sentences and non-parole periods.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 18 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 18 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.