A factual error in a sentencing judge's understanding of an offender's criminal history — specifically, wrongly attributing an additional conviction for a crime of violence — may be material and vitiate the sentence even where the criminal history is not extensive, because proportionally, an additional single conviction for a crime of violence in the relatively recent past has real potential to assume significance. A sentencing judge's failure to address a discrete submission regarding the increased burden of imprisonment due to anxiety about inability to care for a dependent partner constitutes appealable error.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.