A recommendation for parole eligibility at approximately one-third of the head sentence for drug trafficking may be insufficient where the offender has demonstrated impressive and apparently successful rehabilitation efforts, particularly where a lengthy period of supervised parole is needed to support continued rehabilitation. The Court of Appeal has a discretion under Maniadis to receive evidence not before the sentencing judge to avoid a miscarriage of justice, but will not exercise it where the sentencing judge already sentenced on the basis of the relevant mitigating factor (here, drug addiction) and the new evidence would not have led to a significantly different sentence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 17 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 17 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.