The appellant appealed his nine-year sentence for robbery and attempted robbery using an imitation firearm and disguise.
He argued the sentence overemphasized his dated record and failed to account for the totality and gap principles.
The Court of Appeal agreed, finding the sentencing judge failed to properly account for an effective ten-year gap between the appellant's prior robbery convictions and the present offences.
Leave to appeal was granted, and the total sentence was reduced to seven years.
