Pollock v The State of Western Australia

In Pollock v The State of Western Australia, the appellant was convicted of various criminal offences including aggravated burglary, deprivation of liberty, and aggravated armed robbery. The court imposed a total sentence of 12 years' imprisonment, including a five-year community-based order for the five counts of burglary. The appellant challenged the sentence, arguing that the 10 years' imprisonment for the aggravated armed robbery was manifestly excessive, and that the sentences imposed for the breach of the community order did not take into account all relevant considerations. The appellant also argued that the sentences were not in parity with those imposed on their co-offender.

The court was required to determine whether the sentence of 10 years' imprisonment for the aggravated armed robbery was manifestly excessive, whether the sentences were in parity with those imposed on the co-offender, and whether the sentences for the breach of the community order took into account all relevant considerations. The court also had to consider whether the total sentence of 12 years' imprisonment was appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

The court found that the sentence of 10 years' imprisonment for the aggravated armed robbery was manifestly excessive and not in parity with the co-offender's sentence. The court also found that the sentences for the breach of the community order did not take into account all relevant considerations. The court held that the total sentence of 12 years' imprisonment was inappropriate, and reduced the sentence to 10 years. The court allowed the appeal and reduced the sentence from 12 years to 10 years. The court granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal, reducing the sentence from 12 years to 10 years.