A decision under s 84F(3) of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) as to whether it would be unjust to order service of a suspended term involves a value judgment about which reasonable minds may differ. An appellate court will intervene only where the sentencing judge makes a material error such as failing to take into account a relevant consideration, taking into account an irrelevant consideration, or forming an opinion that is unreasonable or plainly unjust. An offender's unsatisfactory overall performance under a conditional suspended imprisonment order, including sporadic engagement with supervision and continued drug use, may justify ordering service of the full suspended term notwithstanding significant personal difficulties.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.