Morgan (a pseudonym) v The King

The appeal concerned the sentence imposed on the appellant, Morgan, who was convicted of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child and persistent sexual abuse of a child. The dispute arose from the appellant's contention that his sentence was excessive. The appeal was heard by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The court was required to determine whether the sentencing judge erred in her assessment of the factual basis for the sentence, specifically regarding the age of the victim during the period of offending. Additionally, the court considered the relevance of the appellant's health conditions in custody and his prospects of rehabilitation upon release, and whether these factors, along with the nature and seriousness of the offending, justified the sentence imposed.

The court reasoned that while the sentencing judge initially stated the offending occurred when the victim was between 12 and 16 years of age, she later found the victim was not yet 12 until September 2016, meaning the offending spanned from when the victim was 11 to 16 years of age. The court acknowledged the appellant's lung condition and diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, but found that prison health services had made appointments and monitoring available, and that the appellant's condition was manageable. The court also considered the appellant's limited antecedents, good work history, and community support, but found these were of limited relevance given the seriousness of the offences and the length of the non-parole period. Applying the principles from *R v D*, the court noted that offences involving children under 12 years of age and extending over time typically attract a head sentence starting around 12 years, while offences against children over 12 might attract a starting point of around 10 years. The court found that the sentencing judge had properly considered the gravity of the offending, including the breach of trust and emotional manipulation, and had applied the relevant sentencing principles.

The appeal was dismissed.