R v Mark Terrence Woods

In the case of R v Mark Terrence Woods, the respondent, Mark Terrence Woods, challenged the determination of his life sentences for various non-fatal sexual offences. The matter was heard in the Court of Criminal Appeal of Victoria. Woods had entered guilty pleas to charges including rape, indecent assault, and indecent acts with a child. The primary issue before the court was whether the original life sentences imposed by the trial judge were manifestly inadequate, considering the respondent's conduct in custody and his completion of the CUBIT program.

The court was required to assess the appropriate weight to be given to the respondent's completion of the CUBIT program, a cognitive-behavioural intervention designed to address the underlying issues contributing to sexual offending. The appeal also considered the respondent's conduct in custody, including whether it demonstrated a reduction in the risk of reoffending. The court needed to determine if these factors warranted a redetermination of the sentences.

The Court of Criminal Appeal concluded that the original life sentences were manifestly inadequate. The judge recognised the respondent's completion of the CUBIT program and his conduct in custody as mitigating factors, but emphasised that they did not sufficiently address the seriousness of the offences or the risk of reoffending. The court found that the original sentences did not adequately reflect the gravity of the crimes or provide sufficient deterrence and protection to the community. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, and the matter was remitted to the trial judge for redetermination of the sentences.