The degree of notional accumulation in an aggregate sentence cannot alone establish manifest excess; the critical question remains whether the aggregate sentence reflects the totality of the criminality involved. A mathematical approach comparing the sum of indicative sentences to the aggregate sentence is not the correct method for challenging an aggregate sentence on totality grounds. Where a sentencing judge expressly states an intention for significant accumulation given different victims and separate episodes of serious criminality, and the aggregate sentence reflects that intention, no error in the application of the totality principle is established.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.