A challenge to a sentencing judge's finding of objective seriousness requires demonstration of House v The King error; the minority view in Fuller v R [2022] NSWCCA 203 that such findings are reviewable as findings of fact was not adopted. There is questionable utility in comparing findings of objective seriousness across cases as such findings are necessarily imprecise and fact-specific. The question of whether an erroneous indicative sentence within an aggregate sentence can ground appellate intervention remains unresolved, with conflicting authority identified but not determined.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.