Matters such as parole board delays, course unavailability, and prison overcrowding that were not raised at sentencing cannot be raised for the first time on a sentence appeal, as an appeal against sentence is a mechanism to correct legal and factual error, not an opportunity to make a better case. A repeat offender for child exploitation material offences who previously received a suspended sentence cannot reasonably expect similar leniency on a second occasion, and parole eligibility with Board supervision is appropriate.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.