R v T (CA139/05)

The appellant appealed against his sentence of three years imprisonment for sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection, arguing that it was manifestly excessive. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and that the judge had appropriately balanced the need for punishment and denunciation with the need for rehabilitation. The court found that the judge had correctly identified a starting point of five years imprisonment, taking into account the aggravating factors of the offence, including the serious effects on the victim and the breach of trust. The court found that the generous overall discount of 40% resulted in an effective sentence that was unexceptional. The court noted that the appellant had not yet started any treatment programme in prison, as recommended by the probation officer and the judge, and that it was regrettable that he may be unable to receive the benefit of a treatment programme in prison prior to his release unless he was detained for a longer period than he perhaps otherwise would have been. However, the court found that there was little more it could do than endorse the judge's recommendation already made for the appellant to be enrolled in a treatment programme.