Celani v The State of Western Australia

Gino Mario Celani appeals against his conviction and sentence for drug offences. He seeks leave to appeal on two grounds. First, he contends that the 15% discount pursuant to s 9AA of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) was manifestly inadequate. Second, he submits that the total effective sentence of 5 years 2 months' imprisonment infringed the first limb of the totality principle. The court held that leave to appeal should be refused on each ground and the appeal dismissed. The discount allowed for the pleas of guilty was not manifestly inadequate. The appellant was not statutorily entitled to a 25% discount because the evidence did not establish that the pleas of guilty were indicated or entered at the first reasonable opportunity. Even if the pleas had been indicated or entered at the first reasonable opportunity, it did not follow that the appellant was entitled to the maximum discount. The sentencing judge was entitled to take into account the strength of the case against the appellant in assessing the appropriate discount under s 9AA of the Sentencing Act. The total effective sentence did not infringe the first limb of the totality principle. The severity of a sentence imposed on an individual count generally falls to be assessed in light of the sentences imposed in respect of the other counts and its contribution to the total effective sentence. The real question is whether the total effective sentence is unreasonable or plainly unjust. In this case, it was not.