FAJ v The Queen

The appeal before the Court was brought by the appellant, FAJ, against a sentence imposed by the County Court of Victoria. The appellant was found guilty of multiple counts of indecent acts with a child under 16 and sexual penetration of a child aged between ten and 16. He entered pleas of guilty and was sentenced to a total effective sentence of imprisonment for six years and six months, with a non-parole period of three years. The appellant contested the severity of the sentence, arguing that the sentencing judge had misapplied the principle of rolling up counts, leading to a manifestly excessive sentence and inconsistency in the treatment of representative counts compared to discrete counts.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the sentencing judge had correctly applied the principle of rolling up counts and whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The appellant submitted that the sentences on the representative counts were inconsistent with those imposed for the discrete counts, and that the totality of the sentence was disproportionate. The Court considered relevant authorities, including R v Jones, R v CJK, R v Abbott, and DPP v OJA, to determine if the sentence was appropriate in light of the principles of sentencing and the aggravating features of the case.

In dismissing the appeal, the Court found that the sentencing judge had correctly applied the principle of rolling up counts and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The Court noted that the sentencing judge had appropriately considered the totality of the offending and the aggravating features, including the vulnerability of the victims and the appellant’s position of trust. The Court concluded that the sentence imposed was within the range of reasonable responses and did not amount to an error in principle or manifest excess. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld.