Where an offender is sentenced for separate and discrete drug offences (here, conspiracy to import and large commercial supply), the sentences must be at least partially cumulative because the sentence for one offence cannot comprehend and reflect the criminality of the other. A sentencing judge who makes such sentences wholly concurrent without providing reasons commits appealable error, particularly where both parties have conceded that some accumulation is appropriate. The respondent's subjective case, including drug addiction and troubled childhood, was insufficient to justify the low total effective sentence for offending of this objective seriousness.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.