R v Price

The appellant, Price, was convicted of one count of unlawful wounding and one count of doing grievous bodily harm. He was sentenced to two years imprisonment for the first offence and five years for the second offence, to be served concurrently with no recommendation for early release. Price applied for leave to appeal against the sentence, arguing that it was manifestly excessive due to the failure to order early release. Price was 17 years old at the time of the offences and has since shown promise for rehabilitation. The first complainant’s athletics career was severely hindered and the second complainant suffered serious long term injuries.

The central issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive due to the failure to order early release. The court had to consider the appellant's age at the time of the offences, his subsequent promise for rehabilitation, and the impact of the offences on the victims. The court also had to assess the principle of proportionality in sentencing and the availability of early release as a mitigating factor.

The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The court found that while the appellant was young at the time of the offences and had shown promise for rehabilitation, this did not necessarily warrant a recommendation for early release. The court emphasised the severity of the offences and their impact on the victims. The court also noted that the principle of proportionality in sentencing did not require a recommendation for early release in every case, particularly where the offences were serious and the victims had suffered significant harm. The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal against the sentence.