The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against sentence by a man convicted of rape, sexual assault and robbery committed when he was 15 years and seven months old.
The court said the sentencing judge had made no error of principle in imposing eight years’ imprisonment for rape, with the final 18 months suspended. The sentences for sexual assault and robbery were set at three years and 18 months respectively, to run concurrently.
The appellant argued that the sentence failed to give adequate weight to his age and mental development. He also submitted that the sentencing judge had not clearly identified a headline sentence before considering mitigation. The prosecution argued that the judge had taken account of his youth, deprived background and limited education, and that the offending was at the upper middle end of seriousness.
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal described the appellant’s age as the strongest mitigating factor. He was 19 when sentenced. The court also noted that he had cooperated with the investigation except for accepting the offending, had effectively no previous convictions, came from a deprived background and had been expelled from school.
The court’s account of the offending said the victim, whom the appellant knew, was lured down a laneway. She was bitten on the breast, causing pain and bleeding for about four weeks, and was raped. Her mobile phone was taken. The court said the attack caused physical and psychological injury and had a devastating impact.
The appellant relied on earlier sentencing appeals involving young offenders. The court distinguished those cases, noting that the offenders had pleaded guilty and benefited from that mitigating factor. It said the appellant could not rely on the same mitigation.
The Court of Appeal said an adult convicted of offending of this seriousness would merit a headline sentence in double figures. Taking account of the appellant’s age, it nevertheless considered that the headline sentence could not be less than eight years. It understood the sentencing judge’s order to leave an actual sentence of six and a half years in custody after suspension.
The appeal was dismissed.