Free v The State of Western Australia

In this case, the appellant, Free, appealed against his conviction and sentence for various sexual offences, including aggravated sexual penetration without consent and other deprivation of liberty offences. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The appellant was sentenced to an aggregate of 11 years imprisonment, which he argued was excessive and violated the totality principle, where the cumulative effect of multiple sentences should not result in a greater deprivation of liberty than that warranted by the aggregate seriousness of the offences.

The central legal issue was whether the total effective sentence imposed by the trial judge was excessive and contravened the totality principle. The court was required to determine whether the sentence was disproportionate to the gravity of the crimes committed, and if it exceeded the limits prescribed by the principle of proportionality in sentencing. The appellant argued that his sentence was manifestly excessive and that the trial judge failed to adequately consider the totality principle.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge did not sufficiently consider the totality principle in arriving at the sentence. The appellate court held that the aggregate sentence imposed on the appellant was manifestly excessive and did not reflect the proper application of the totality principle. The court emphasised that in cases of multiple deprivation of liberty offences, the total effective sentence must be proportionate to the aggregate seriousness of the offences. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, quashed the sentence imposed by the trial judge, and ordered the appellant be re-sentenced.