The case confirms that a sentencing judge does not err by referring to prior convictions as an 'aggravating feature' when sentencing, provided the structure of the sentencing remarks demonstrates that the objective gravity of the offence was first determined without reference to prior convictions, and the prior convictions were only taken into account in determining where within the range set by objective circumstances the sentence should lie. The case also demonstrates that even where individual sentences are within range, the principle of totality may require greater concurrence of sentences, particularly where the offender is already serving substantial sentences imposed by other judges for related offending.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.