Hordern v R

In this matter, Hordern appealed against his sentence for aggravated indecent assaults on children under 10 years of age, contending that the sentencing judge had erred in finding that the offences were planned. The appeal was heard in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal. The appellant also argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive. In addition, the appellant contended that the sentence imposed for breaches of an extended supervision order should be quashed as the sentencing judge had failed to consider the availability of an extended supervision order. The appeal was dismissed.
The appeal raised questions about the assessment of the objective seriousness of the offences and the significance of the appellant’s propensity to reoffend. It also raised questions about the relevance of the availability of an extended supervision or detention order to the sentencing judge’s assessment of the appropriate penalty. The court considered the authorities on the assessment of objective seriousness and the relevance of an offender’s propensity to reoffend, and concluded that the sentencing judge had not erred in his approach to sentencing. The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive.
The court found that the appellant’s offences were of significant objective seriousness, given the appellant’s position of trust and authority over the victims, and the significant breach of that trust. The court found that the appellant’s propensity to reoffend was a relevant consideration in assessing the appropriate penalty. The court found that the sentencing judge had given proper weight to the appellant’s propensity to reoffend in assessing the appropriate penalty. The court found that the availability of an extended supervision or detention order was irrelevant to the sentencing judge’s assessment of the appropriate penalty. The appeal was dismissed.