Where a sentencing judge finds moral culpability reduced but not eliminated by mental impairment, denunciation may still be retained as a sentencing purpose even where deterrence is eliminated. Evidence of the materialisation of a risk already taken into account at sentencing (such as mental health deterioration or visa cancellation) does not constitute fresh evidence admissible on appeal. Complaints about the weight given to [name withheld] principles are properly characterised as aspects of a manifest excess argument rather than grounds of specific error.
The full text is available to signed-in members.