Mohamed v The King [No 2]

In Mohamed v The King, the applicant appealed against sentences imposed following convictions for arson and terrorism offences. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant's appeal was initially against both sentences, but the appeal against the first sentence was abandoned at the hearing. The Court reserved its decision on the appeal against the second sentence and the application to re-instate the abandoned appeal against the first sentence. Following the decision in Totaan v The Queen, the Court was required to determine whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to consider the impact of the sentence on the applicant's family.

The court had to decide if the sentencing judge made an error by not considering the family hardship as required by Totaan v The Queen when imposing the first sentence. The court found that the sentencing judge did indeed make an error in not considering the family hardship. However, the court also concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that the Court could reduce the total effective sentence despite this error. The court held that the error did not warrant a reduction in the sentence due to the severity of the crimes committed.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal against the first sentence, acknowledging the sentencing error but declining to adjust the sentence. The court also considered the cumulation of the second sentence, delivering a judgment that adjusted the cumulation on the second sentence. Ultimately, the court refused leave to appeal, confirming the applicant's appeal against the first sentence was now considered.