CAND v The State of Western Australia

In the Court of Appeal, CAND appeals against both his conviction and sentence for indecent dealing with and sexual penetration of a de facto child. The trial judge found that the appellant engaged in the prohibited acts with a child under the age of 16 and in a position of authority over them. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining whether the trial judge's directions to the jury adequately addressed the impact of the delay between the alleged offences and the trial on the appellant's opportunity to test the evidence of the complainant. Additionally, the Court of Appeal had to assess whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's directions were insufficient as they did not sufficiently address the impact of the delay on the appellant's ability to challenge the complainant's evidence. The Court noted that a Longman direction should have been given, which would have informed the jury of the potential effect of the delay on the reliability of the complainant's testimony. The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction and ordered a retrial. Regarding the sentence, the Court of Appeal found that while the total effective sentence was not manifestly excessive, the sentence imposed in relation to one count of indecent dealing was manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal reduced the sentence for that count.