Fleet v Leeson

In Fleet v Leeson, the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory heard an appeal against a sentence imposed by a Magistrate. The appellant, Eliott John Fleet, was sentenced to an aggregate term of 28 months’ imprisonment on a series of charges, including driving whilst disqualified, minor theft, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, attempting to escape custody, and resisting a public official. The appellant appealed on the basis that the Magistrate failed to take into account his subjective circumstances and the principle of totality, resulting in a manifestly excessive sentence.

The court found that the Magistrate's failure to consider the appellant's subjective circumstances led to an inadequate sentencing process. The Magistrate did not refer to any of the reports tendered regarding the appellant’s background, mental health issues, and efforts to rehabilitate himself, which were critical in assessing his prospects for rehabilitation. The court emphasised that the Magistrate had ample time to review the material before delivering the sentencing reasons. The appeal was allowed, and the sentences imposed by the Magistrate were set aside.

Upon re-sentencing, the court noted that the appellant had a lengthy criminal history but had made attempts to improve his response to supervision and address factors likely to lead to re-offending. The court reduced the sentences by a percentage to account for the appellant's pleas of guilty, and imposed new sentences for each charge, with some sentences to be served immediately and others suspended with conditions. The court also upheld the fines imposed by the Magistrate for the offences of exposing a child to cannabis smoke and contempt of court, as the appellant had already served a sufficient period of imprisonment to expiate those fines.