GGM v The State of Western Australia [No 2]

The case involves GGM, who was convicted of five counts of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 13 years, and the State of Western Australia. The applicant sought leave to appeal against the severity of the sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The central issue was whether the overall sentence imposed infringed the first limb of the totality principle. This principle asserts that the sum of a defendant's sentences for multiple offences should not be excessive in relation to the gravity of the individual offences and the need to achieve the aims of sentencing.

The court was required to determine if the cumulative sentence of 14 years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 10 years, was disproportionate considering the individual sentences for each offence ranged from two to five years. The court also needed to assess whether the sentence failed to achieve the purposes of general deterrence, denunciation, and retribution. It further needed to consider whether the sentencing judge had properly exercised his discretion under the relevant statutory framework.

The court held that the sentence did not infringe the first limb of the totality principle. The court reasoned that the severity of the crimes warranted a significant cumulative sentence to achieve the aims of general deterrence, denunciation, and retribution. The sentencing judge had carefully considered the individual sentences for each offence and ensured that the cumulative sentence was proportionate to the gravity of the crimes. The court also found that the sentence was not excessive in relation to the individual offences, as it was within the range of sentences typically imposed for such serious crimes. The court ultimately denied the applicant's application for leave to appeal against the sentence.