Sentences should be backdated to reflect pre-sentence custody as a matter of universal practice, not merely desirable practice. A sentencing judge who departs from this practice without clearly stating reasons commits error. Where a judge merely states that pre-sentence custody has been 'taken into account' without backdating, this may be insufficient to demonstrate that proper account was given, particularly where the sentence structure does not transparently reflect the deduction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 25 later cases that cite this judgment.
13 of the 25 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.