The appellant appealed his convictions for possession of stolen prohibited weapons and his sentence.
He argued the trial judge erred by stating he was 'deemed' to have knowledge the weapons were stolen under the doctrine of recent possession.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding the trial judge understood the inference was permissive despite using the word 'deemed'.
However, the sentence appeal was allowed.
The trial judge erred by imposing a longer sentence on the appellant than his co-accused while purporting to apply the parity principle.
The sentence was reduced from two years to 18 months.
