Where a sentencing judge has expressly considered the impact of accumulation on the proportion between the effective head sentence and effective non-parole period, and has given express consideration to totality, a very slight exceedance (0.5%) of the 75% statutory ratio in the overall effective sentence does not constitute error. A misidentification of a statutory subsection number in sentencing remarks is a mere slip where the correct maximum penalty was stated, the offence was correctly described, and the error did not infect the reasoning.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.