DPP v Shearer (a pseudonym)

The case of DPP v Shearer (a pseudonym) involved the Director of Public Prosecutions appealing against the sentences imposed on the respondent for four charges of incest against his step-daughter, aged between 11 and 14 years. The trial judge in the County Court of Victoria found the respondent guilty of the offences and sentenced him to four years' imprisonment for each count, with the sentences to run concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of 8 years and 6 months. The Court of Appeal was asked to determine whether the sentences were manifestly inadequate, particularly in light of the respondent's extensive criminal history, including previous offences of violence against women, and his post-offence conduct, which included attempts to persuade the complainant and her mother to withdraw the allegations.

The Court of Appeal examined whether the trial judge had appropriately considered the relevant aggravating factors, including the breach of trust, the respondent's criminal history, and his post-offence conduct. The Court noted that the trial judge had acknowledged the seriousness of the offences and the aggravating factors but had balanced these against the respondent's early guilty plea and his remorse. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had given insufficient weight to the aggravating factors and that the sentence was manifestly inadequate.

In allowing the appeal, the Court of Appeal resentenced the respondent to a total effective sentence of 10 years and 6 months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 7 years and 6 months. The Court of Appeal referred to the decision in DPP v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] VSCA 360 to support its conclusion that the original sentence was manifestly inadequate. The Court of Appeal emphasised the importance of ensuring that sentences for serious sexual offences against children reflect the gravity of such crimes and adequately account for all relevant aggravating factors.