The offender was sentenced following a plea of guilty to one count of domestic trafficking in children contrary to s 271.7 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. The offender was sentenced for additional state offences. Original sentence imposed 11 years and 5 months imprisonment with a 6 year and 3 month non-parole period. The offender appealed on the basis of the severity of the individual sentences and the totality of the sentences.
Guilty Plea: The discount relevant to the plea would have been the same whether viewed objectively for its utilitarian benefit or subjectively for the offender’s willingness to facilitate the course of justice. It was a plea entered relatively early but was not a plea at the earliest reasonable opportunity.
Contrition: The sentencing judge concluded that there was no evidence of contrition. The offender was represented at the sentencing hearing by counsel. The offender did not give evidence. There was no evidence relied on during the sentence proceedings to establish the offender’s contrition. There is no evidence to support the conclusion that the issue of the offender’s contrition was overlooked by counsel who appeared on sentence.
General Deterrence: Primary judge was correct to have regard to general deterrence. Contrary to the offender’s submission it would have been an error by the primary judge if general deterrence had not been taken into account on sentence.
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal against conviction dismissed. Appeal against sentence dismissed.
Guilty Plea: The discount relevant to the plea would have been the same whether viewed objectively for its utilitarian benefit or subjectively for the offender’s willingness to facilitate the course of justice. It was a plea entered relatively early but was not a plea at the earliest reasonable opportunity.
Contrition: The sentencing judge concluded that there was no evidence of contrition. The offender was represented at the sentencing hearing by counsel. The offender did not give evidence. There was no evidence relied on during the sentence proceedings to establish the offender’s contrition. There is no evidence to support the conclusion that the issue of the offender’s contrition was overlooked by counsel who appeared on sentence.
General Deterrence: Primary judge was correct to have regard to general deterrence. Contrary to the offender’s submission it would have been an error by the primary judge if general deterrence had not been taken into account on sentence.
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal against conviction dismissed. Appeal against sentence dismissed.
