Complaints about the weight attributed to particular sentencing factors are to be treated as particularisations of a manifest excess ground, not as independent errors of the House v The King kind. The preferred test for manifest excess in the ACT is whether the sentence was outside the range of available sentences, not whether 'no reasonable sentencing judge' could have imposed it. A sentencing judge does not err by accepting an incomplete pre-sentence report where the offender declined to participate and sufficient other material was before the court.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.