A sentencing judge who includes both the utilitarian value of a guilty plea (s 16A(2)(g)) and subjective contrition (s 16A(2)(f)) within a single quantified percentage discount commits Xiao v R error, even where the judge expressly referred to the utilitarian value as a relevant consideration. The utilitarian value must be separately identified and preferably quantified as an objective factor, with contrition treated as an unquantified subjective factor through instinctive synthesis. However, such error may be 'relatively technical' and may not result in a lesser sentence on resentencing.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.