A sentencing judge's assessment of objective seriousness is classically within the sentencing discretion and the CCA will be slow to intervene. Where factual matters making up multiple counts are largely co-extensive, a finding of mid-range objective seriousness for both counts is not precluded and does not constitute 'double dipping' provided the principles of concurrency and accumulation are correctly applied. The relationship between rehabilitation and reoffending as mitigating factors is confirmed: while conceptually distinct, they share much in common and a sentencing judge's findings relevant to one may sufficiently address the other even without express separate findings.
The full text is available to signed-in members.