The appellant appealed his indeterminate sentence as a dangerous offender, arguing that the sentencing judge erred by rejecting a joint sentencing submission for a determinate sentence followed by a long-term supervision order.
The appellant had pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting four children in 2004 and received a determinate sentence.
While on probation, he sexually assaulted two of his own children and breached a prohibition order.
The sentencing judge imposed an indeterminate sentence based on psychiatric evidence that the appellant's pedophilia could not be managed in the community and that he posed a danger to children.
The Court of Appeal upheld the indeterminate sentence, finding that the sentencing judge properly applied the legal test and that the evidence supported the conclusion that the appellant could not be managed in the community.
