Pulitano v R

In the case of Pulitano v R, the appellant was convicted of several offences and sentenced to imprisonment, with the sentence to be suspended for a period of time. The appellant appealed against the sentence, arguing that the pre-sentence custody should have been taken into account by backdating or reducing the sentence. The court of appeal considered whether the trial judge had erred in not backdating the sentence and whether the pre-sentence custody should have been taken into account in deciding the kind of sentence to be imposed.
The court of appeal held that the trial judge was not required to backdate the sentence as it was suspended, but the pre-sentence custody could be taken into account in deciding the kind of sentence to be imposed. The court held that the trial judge had considered the pre-sentence custody in deciding the kind of sentence and had not erred in not backdating the sentence. The court also held that sentencing in round figures was not mandatory and that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal against sentence was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld. The court noted that the trial judge had considered the pre-sentence custody in deciding the kind of sentence and that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive. The court held that the trial judge had not erred in not backdating the sentence as it was suspended, and that sentencing in round figures was not mandatory.