Where an offender's psychiatric condition known at the time of sentencing worsens significantly during imprisonment, fresh evidence of that deterioration may throw 'significant new light' on the condition sufficient to reopen the sentencing discretion under R v Eliasen. Mental illness that does not diminish moral culpability is nonetheless relevant to sentencing as moderating general deterrence and, more importantly, because imprisonment operates more harshly on a person who is ill. A sentencing judge's failure to give reasons for the non-parole period, while not obligatory, may result in the appellate court being unable to be confident the non-parole period received discrete consideration, providing an independent basis for resentencing.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.