A sentencing judge who acknowledges that an offender's past assistance to police had some value, and that the offender suffered serious consequences in custody as a result of that assistance, commits House v The King error by failing to attribute any discount for past assistance under s 23 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW). The judge must separately identify and quantify discounts for past and future assistance under s 23(4). A misstatement of drug quantity in sentencing remarks does not vitiate the sentence where the context of the remarks demonstrates the judge was aware of the correct figure and the difference was marginal relative to the statutory threshold.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.