R v Wacyk

This is an appeal against a sentence imposed by a District Court Judge. The appellant was convicted on his plea of guilty of two counts of perjury. The appeal was allowed and the sentence was varied. The Court found that the sentencing judge's approach was erroneous in that he compared the present case to a previous case rather than considering the question of suspension directly. The Court considered the appropriate sentence and found that the head sentence was correct, but that a shorter non-parole period should be fixed. The Court also found that the sentence should not be suspended, as the offence was serious and the appellant's age and circumstances did not warrant suspension. The Court ordered that the appellant should serve a term of imprisonment for one year and nine months with a non-parole period of one month. The Court also ordered that the appellant should make restitution to the insurer which suffered loss because of the perjury.