R v Lemmo

The applicant, Lemmo, appealed against his conviction and sentence for multiple armed robbery offences. The applicant had pleaded guilty to a series of armed robberies committed in 2009 and additional robberies in 2011 while on bail for the 2009 offences. The trial judge sentenced the applicant to 12 years imprisonment for each offence and made a declaration of serious violent offence. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant's pleas were coerced, if he was of sound mind when entering the pleas, and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive or inadequate.

The court examined the applicant's claims that his pleas were coerced and that he was not of sound mind. The court found no evidence to support these claims and concluded that the applicant's pleas were voluntary and made by a person of sound mind. The court further assessed the sentence, considering the aggravating factor of the applicant committing further offences while on bail. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive or inadequate, taking into account the seriousness and frequency of the offences.

In light of the above, the court dismissed the applicant's application for an extension of time to appeal against his conviction and also refused leave to appeal against his sentence. The applicant's claims of coercion and lack of sound mind were not substantiated, and the sentence was deemed appropriate given the circumstances of the case.