A sentencing judge is entitled to draw inferences from the totality of the evidence, including information provided by the offender to a clinical psychologist, even where the agreed facts are silent on the matter. Mathematical calculations comparing indicative sentences to maximum penalties are not a proper basis for a manifest excess challenge. Consideration of the overall criminal scheme does not, without more, conflate the offender's role with that of co-offenders higher in the hierarchy.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.