A factual error in an Agreed Statement of Facts will not infect the sentencing process where the sentencing judge plainly relied on other accurate material (here, a detailed schedule of transactions) that correctly reflected the true position. A sentencing judge's observation that a particular drug causes considerable social harm is a truism and does not constitute impermissible differentiation between drugs contrary to Adams v R, provided no finding is made about the relative seriousness of one drug compared with another.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.