Where a sentencing judge finds special circumstances and determines a specific non-parole period ratio, but accumulation with pre-existing sentences distorts that ratio, the appellate court will assume the distortion was an unintended consequence unless the sentencing judge expressly explains the departure. A statement that 'no lesser non-parole period' would address the seriousness of the offending is insufficient to overcome this inference. The pattern of past sentencing is a yardstick but does not determine the range of sentences available to a sentencing judge.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.