Where a sentencing judge applies an incorrect (higher) maximum penalty, the error vitiates the sentencing discretion and requires re-sentencing. Multiple aggravated indecent assaults occurring within a single hour on one occasion are properly characterised as a continuing episode of criminality warranting concurrent rather than cumulative sentences. Evidence of extra-curial punishment (vigilante attack related to the offences) must be taken into account as a subjective circumstance. A sentencing judge may not treat an offender's maintenance of innocence as aggravating the criminality or as disentitling the offender to a finding of special circumstances.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.