R v Polanski

In the case of R v Polanski, the accused faced a charge of murder. The trial judge found him unfit to be tried, but made a qualified finding of guilty, nominating a limiting term of imprisonment. The appeal was against the nominated term. The court had to determine whether the nominated term was manifestly excessive and whether the appeal against the term was allowed. The appellant argued that the nominated term was manifestly excessive because the maximum penalty for the offence was life imprisonment, and the appellant had been a young offender at the time of the crime.

The court considered the principles for determining whether a term of imprisonment is manifestly excessive. It noted that the term must be unjust, outrageous, or extravagant in the circumstances of the case. The court also considered the nature of the crime and the appellant's age at the time of the offence. The court found that the nominated term was not manifestly excessive, as it took into account the appellant's age and the seriousness of the crime. The court also noted that the trial judge had considered the appellant's age and the circumstances of the case when determining the term.

The court also considered the appeal against the nominated term. The court found that the appeal was not well-founded, as the nominated term was not manifestly excessive. The court noted that the trial judge had considered the appellant's age and the circumstances of the case when determining the term. The court also noted that the appellant had not provided any evidence to support his argument that the term was manifestly excessive.

The court dismissed the appeal against the nominated term and confirmed the finding of the trial judge. The court found that the nominated term was not manifestly excessive and was appropriate in the circumstances of the case.