R v McMillan

In the case of R v McMillan, the applicant appealed against his sentence on the grounds that it was manifestly excessive. The applicant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for federal offences, which were to be served cumulatively on terms of imprisonment imposed in respect of state offences. The applicant argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive and should be reduced. The court had to decide whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and, if so, what the appropriate sentence should be.

The court considered the nature and circumstances of the offences, the applicant's criminal history, and the principles of sentencing. The court noted that the applicant had a significant criminal history and that the offences were serious. However, the court also noted that the applicant had shown some remorse and had taken steps to address his drug addiction. The court concluded that the sentence was not manifestly excessive but that the applicant's presentence custody should be taken into account in imposing sentence.

The court granted the application and allowed the appeal for the limited purpose of varying the sentences. The court set aside the declaration pursuant to s 161 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 and in lieu thereof, declared that the applicant was held in presentence custody between 16 August and 27 September 2002 and between 30 January 2003 and 9 June 2004, a period of 538 days. The court directed that the records of the court be noted with the fact that this declaration was made and its details and the fact that the declared time was taken into account in imposing sentence. The court also set aside the sentences imposed on indictment 519/04 and in lieu thereof, sentenced the applicant to imprisonment for three years on each count, these sentences to be served concurrently. The court directed that each of these sentences commence immediately after the applicant had served 2½ years of the period of imprisonment imposed in respect of the offences set out in indictments 447/03, 518/04 and 27/04. The court directed that the applicant be released after he had served nine months of imprisonment under these sentences upon his giving security by recognisance in the sum of $5,000 that he will be of good behaviour for three years.