A sentencing judge who describes a suspended sentence as 'outside a proper exercise of sentencing discretion' or as 'an erroneous exercise of sentencing discretion', when suspension is within range, commits an identifiable error of law by precluding consideration of an available sentencing outcome. The critical distinction is between a judge who considers suspension and declines to impose it, and a judge who treats suspension as unavailable.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.