R v T; ex parte

The case of R v T; ex parte involved the Attorney-General, who sought to appeal against the sentence imposed on the respondent, T, by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The respondent had been convicted of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship, and despite voluntarily presenting to the police, was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment to be served by an intensive correction order. The Attorney-General argued that this sentence was manifestly inadequate and that a term of actual imprisonment was usually required. The respondent had already served three months of the intensive correction order.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence of 12 months imprisonment to be served by an intensive correction order was manifestly inadequate and whether the actual term of imprisonment was usually required. The court was required to consider the principles of sentencing and the circumstances of the case in determining whether the sentence was manifestly inadequate.

The court found that the sentence was not manifestly inadequate and dismissed the appeal. The court considered the principles of sentencing and the fact that the respondent had voluntarily presented to the police and pleaded guilty. The court also noted that the respondent had already served three months of the intensive correction order. The court found that the sentence was appropriate in the circumstances and dismissed the appeal. The respondent was ordered to continue to serve the balance of the intensive correction order.