Read the full judgment text of CACC 000991/1979 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 3 January 1980 before Huggins JA, Cons J, Yang J.
Criminal law – robbery – sentencing – appeal against sentence – totality of sentences – whether learned judge erred in adopting a totality approach to sentencing – whether sentences were excessive having regard to the appellants' ages (1st Appellant aged 19, 2nd Appellant aged 17) – whether failure to distinguish between two robberies for which 1st Appellant was convicted was an error where he pleaded guilty to one but not the other – whether learned judge erred in rejecting the suggestion that the robbery was committed to pay compensation for car damage – totality approach not improper in principle, though the total arrived at was excessive – sentences higher than desirable given the appellants' youth – Court of Appeal unable to interfere with three and a half years imposed in unrelated earlier case – appeals allowed – 1st Appellant's original sentences of two and a half years on each of two charges (consecutive) substituted with one year on the first charge and one and a half years on the third charge, consecutive to the three and a half years previously imposed, making a total of six years – 2nd Appellant's original sentence of two years and three months substituted with one year's imprisonment, consecutive to the three and a half years, making a total of four and a half years
Legal issues: Propriety of the totality approach to sentencing · Excessiveness of the sentences having regard to the appellants' ages · Failure to distinguish between the two robberies for sentencing · Rejection of suggestion that robbery was to pay car damage compensation
Outcome: Appeals against sentence allowed; sentences reduced and substituted.