R v SCOTT

The appeal concerned a decision by a sentencing judge to revoke a suspended sentence and impose a reduced custodial sentence. The appellant had been sentenced in 2008 to two years and six months imprisonment, suspended on the condition of entering into a bond. After an initial breach in 2009, which was excused and the bond extended, the appellant committed further breaches by failing to attend supervision appointments. The sentencing judge revoked the bond but reduced the original sentence. The appellant sought to appeal this decision, arguing that the breaches should have been excused or that special circumstances warranted a reduction in the sentence.

The court was required to determine whether there were proper grounds to excuse the appellant's breaches of the bond under section 58(3) of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act, and alternatively, whether special circumstances existed under section 58(4) of the Act that would justify reducing the original sentence. The appellant also sought to introduce fresh evidence in the form of an affidavit detailing a physical condition and the psychological impact of witnessing a killing.

The Full Court dismissed the appeal. It reasoned that the purpose of a suspended sentence would be undermined if repeated breaches of its conditions, designed to ensure its workability, were excused. The court found that the sentencing judge had correctly concluded there were no proper grounds to excuse the breaches. Furthermore, the court held that the sentencing judge was already aware of the appellant's psychological issues, and the additional material in the affidavit would not have altered the judge's decision, especially as the information could have been readily obtained with proper inquiry. Consequently, the application to introduce fresh evidence was rejected, and the court agreed that no special circumstances existed to warrant a reduction in the sentence under section 58(4).