Background
The appellant was sentenced for 33 forgery counts arising from a single act. The sentencing judge accepted the prosecution submission that the offending comprised a series of criminal acts and treated that as an aggravating circumstance under s 21A(2)(m).
The appellant had completed community service and had partly served an intensive correction order. The decision’s substantive reasons and the parties’ identities are restricted.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that the sentencing judge erred by treating the offences as a series of criminal acts for the purpose of the aggravating circumstance. The error was conceded.
On resentencing, the Court considered whether imprisonment was the only appropriate sentence. In the unusual circumstances, including the appellant’s completed community service and partial service of the intensive correction order, it imposed a community correction order.
Key Takeaways
- Thirty-three forgery counts arose from a single act.
- The sentencing aggravation finding under s 21A(2)(m) was erroneous.
- Resentencing resulted in a community correction order, rather than imprisonment.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates that multiple counts do not necessarily establish a “series of criminal acts” for sentencing-aggravation purposes. It also confirms that the appellate court’s resentencing discretion may support a community-based order where the offender’s circumstances, including compliance with earlier orders, make imprisonment unnecessary.