Where co-offenders are sentenced on separate statements of agreed facts containing material differences, the parity comparison must be conducted by comparing what each offender's own agreed facts demonstrate about their culpability. It is erroneous to compare an offender's role as disclosed in their own agreed facts with the co-offender's role as disclosed in that same set of agreed facts, because the co-offender's sentence will not be based on those facts. An assessment of relative criminality for parity purposes is an evaluative assessment, not a finding of fact.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.