Sentence appeal dismissed; fresh evidence of harsh pre-sentence custody conditions not admitted.
The appellant pleaded guilty to firearms offences and was sentenced to four years in custody.
At sentencing, he sought additional credit for pre-sentence custody due to harsh conditions at the detention centre, specifically that his leg injuries prevented him from accessing the yard.
The sentencing judge granted standard 1.5:1 credit but refused additional credit, disbelieving the appellant's claims.
On appeal, the appellant sought to introduce fresh evidence of complaints made to the Ombudsman.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the fresh evidence did not meet the Palmer test and the sentencing judge made no error in principle in exercising her discretion.
