Read the full judgment text of CAAR 000009/1992 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 8 June 1994 before Power, V.-P., Mortimer, J.A., Sears, J..
Criminal law – sentencing – review – corruption – offering advantage to public servant – conspiracy – concurrent sentences – distinct transactions – manifestly inadequate – totality principle – remorse – delay – health – comparison with co-defendant – Attorney General's application – sentence varied from 7 years to 9 years – one count ordered consecutive by 2 years – heinous offences striking at administration of justice – deterrent sentences – key figure in corrupt offers to subvert prosecutions – huge sums involved – respondent in his fifties – co-operation with ICAC – withdrawal of appeal against conviction – medical reports of high blood pressure and depressive reaction – two-year delay since sentencing – overall criminality considered – totality principle applied.
Legal issues: Whether concurrent sentences were wrong in principle for multiple distinct corrupt transactions
Outcome: Application for review granted; sentence varied.
Cited by 3 cases