Penny v The State of Western Australia

Penny brought an appeal against the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The appellant had been convicted of multiple charges of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, with the sentences to run consecutively. The appeal was brought on the basis that the aggregate sentence was disproportionate to the overall offending, and manifestly excessive. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The court considered the principle of totality, which is that the aggregate sentence should not be disproportionate to the overall offending. The court also considered whether the sentence was manifestly excessive. The court considered the appellant's offending in the context of the principle of totality. The court found that while the aggregate sentence was harsh, it was not disproportionate to the overall offending, and was not manifestly excessive.

The court dismissed the appeal. The aggregate sentence was not disproportionate to the overall offending, and was not manifestly excessive. The court found that the sentence was appropriate in the circumstances, and did not amount to a crushing burden on the appellant. The court affirmed the sentence of the Supreme Court.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, and affirmed the sentence of the Supreme Court. The aggregate sentence was not disproportionate to the overall offending, and was not manifestly excessive. The sentence was appropriate in the circumstances, and did not amount to a crushing burden on the appellant.