R v Maz

The appellant, who was convicted on multiple counts of offences, including indecent treatment of a child under 16 years and common assault, appealed against the sentence imposed. The appellant argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive, particularly in relation to the five-year imprisonment for three counts of common assault, where the maximum penalty for such an offence is one year. The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and, if so, whether any errors should lead to the Court exercising its overall sentencing discretion anew.

The Court of Appeal found that the head sentence of 10 years imprisonment for the three counts of indecent treatment was not manifestly excessive, but the five-year imprisonment for the common assault counts was. The Court held that the error in sentencing was material, as it resulted in a significant departure from the maximum penalty for the offence. Consequently, the Court exercised its overall sentencing discretion and set aside the five-year imprisonment, substituting it with a six-month imprisonment term to be served concurrently with all other terms. The Court also amended the indictment to correct the descriptions of the victims and their ages as per the evidence.

The Court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the excessive five-year imprisonment sentence and substituting it with a six-month imprisonment term for the common assault counts. The Court also amended the indictment to reflect the correct descriptions of the victims and their ages. The appeal was otherwise dismissed, and the appellant was granted leave to appeal.