Roberts v The King

The appellant, Mr Roberts, appealed against his sentence following a conviction on four charges of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 years. The second charge was aggravated by the fact that the complainant became pregnant as a result of the offence. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal. The primary issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed on the second charge was manifestly excessive.

The court noted that the sentence for the second charge was higher than the sentences for the remaining three charges. It was crucial to assess whether this disparity was justified or if the sentence on the second charge was manifestly excessive. The court referred to previous cases such as R v Verdins and Worboyes v The Queen to evaluate the proportionality of the sentence. The court found that the sentence on the second charge was indeed manifestly excessive when compared to the sentences on the other charges. This conclusion was based on the principle of proportionality, which mandates that sentences for similar offences should be consistent unless there are compelling reasons for disparity.

As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the sentencing court for a resentencing on the second charge. The court emphasised the need for the resentencing to reflect a proportionate and just outcome, taking into account the principles of criminal sentencing and the specific circumstances of the case. The final orders of the court were that the appeal be allowed, the sentence on the second charge be quashed, and the matter be remitted for resentencing.