R v M

The appellant, who was convicted of two counts of indecent treatment of a child under the age of 12 who is a lineal descendant, appealed against both the conviction and the sentence. The case was heard in the relevant appellate court, where the appellant argued that the verdict was unreasonable and unsafe on the evidence presented. The court was required to determine whether the verdict was unreasonable or insupportable, as well as whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court considered the evidence presented during the trial and the credibility of the witnesses. It was determined that the verdict was not unreasonable or insupportable, as the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. Furthermore, the court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, taking into account the appellant's lack of prior convictions and the fact that he was the father of the victim.

The appeal against the conviction was dismissed, and the application for an extension of time to appeal against the sentence was allowed. However, the application for leave to appeal against the sentence was refused, as the court found that the sentence was appropriate given the circumstances of the case.

The final orders of the court were to dismiss the appeal against conviction, allow the application for an extension of time to appeal against the sentence, and refuse the application for leave to appeal against the sentence.