The effect of intellectual disability or low cognitive functioning on sentencing is not confined to cases where there is a causal connection between the disability and the offending; it extends to the offender's suitability as a vehicle for general deterrence, reduced moral culpability, and the harsher experience of incarceration. Where youth and intellectual disability co-exist, their combined effect on sentencing is greater than the separate application of each principle. A sentencing judge who relies upon a factor such as disadvantaged childhood or low cognitive functioning in submissions must address it in the sentencing remarks, either expressly or by necessary inference, or risk appellable error.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.