CRIME — appeals — appeal against sentence — parity principle — parity between sentences of applicant and co-offender — where applicant and co-offenders pleaded guilty and sentenced on basis of participation in joint criminal enterprise — where Form 1 matter taken into account on sentence of co-offender — significant differences in subjective cases — whether justifiable sense of grievance
Quick Take
1When assessing parity between co-offenders' sentences, a simple numerical comparison of head sentences is not the correct approach; the court must analyse all differences in criminality and subjective circumstances to determine whether the proportion between the sentences gives rise to a justifiable sense of grievance.
2A party sentenced on the basis of participation in a joint criminal enterprise is sentenced for the full range of criminal acts done by any party in carrying out the enterprise, so that a lesser physical role does not necessarily produce a proportionately significant reduction in objective criminality.
3The existence of a Form 1 matter taken into account on a co-offender's sentence does not inevitably lead to a conclusion of marked disparity where the complaining offender received a higher sentence; persistent breaches of conditional liberty, unsatisfactory responses to supervision, sparse evidence of remorse, and poor rehabilitation prospects can justify a materially higher sentence notwithstanding the co-offender's additional criminality on the Form 1.
