Where a sentencing judge finds special circumstances and states an intention to implement a particular non-parole period to head sentence ratio, but the effect of accumulation with pre-existing sentences results in a higher overall ratio, error is established unless the sentencing judge provides an explanation for the departure. The court endorsed the principle from Elwood v R that it is no answer for the Crown to submit that there might have been a justification for the ultimate sentencing order where nothing in the reasons suggests that was intended.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.