R v Carter

In the case of R v Carter, the applicant sought to reopen his sentence of life imprisonment for murder, arguing that 487 days spent in custody should be deemed time already served under the sentence. The applicant submitted that a further 487 days of custody should have been declared as time already served, despite these days not being presentence custody for the murder offence. The legal issues centred on whether there was a discretion to make a declaration for presentence custody not otherwise declarable, and if the applicant's argument about the totality principle and concurrent sentences applied.

The court examined the statutory framework, particularly Section 161 of the Punishment and Sentencing Act (PSA), which was in force before the 2004 amendments. It concluded that the period in question was attributable to sentences for other offences and not presentence custody for the murder offence. The court noted that the applicant had misunderstood the statutory language and the purpose of the words "otherwise orders" at the end of Section 161. There was no discretion to make a declaration for presentence custody if it was not declarable under the terms of the provision. The court found that the applicant's arguments about the totality principle and concurrent sentences did not apply as he was subject to a mandatory sentence for murder.

Ultimately, the court refused the application to reopen the sentence, holding that there was no basis under the legislation to declare the 487 days as time already served for the murder offence. The applicant's appeal against the conviction at the first trial had resulted in the loss of credit for the time served concurrently with other sentences, which could not be reclaimed for the murder offence under the statutory framework. The applicant's request for the additional days to be declared as time already served was denied.