A ground of appeal framed as 'insufficient weight' given to a sentencing factor accepts that the factor was considered and can only succeed if House v The King error is demonstrated. A sentencing judge who correctly identifies and applies the relevant principles regarding mental illness, totality with interstate sentences, and rehabilitation is unlikely to be disturbed on appeal merely because the appellate court might have given different weight to those factors.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.