Guilty plea may be reconsidered

Man suggested he pleaded guilty because it was best option

A Sydney man is to return to Supreme Court later this month after concerns were raised whether the court should accept his guilty plea.

Martin Hugh MacLellan, 22, of Townsend Street pleaded guilty to a single count of invitation to sexual touching. Charges of sexual assault and sexual interference were withdrawn.

The offence occurred in March 2016 in Sydney. The female victim was 14 at the time.

During a Supreme Court appearance Friday, prosecutor John MacDonald raised a concern after reading MacLellan’s presentence report in which he suggested he pleaded guilty because it was his best option.

“He should not be sentenced if that is the case,” said MacDonald.

Justice Patrick Murray, who is scheduled to sentence MacLellan June 25, agreed that the comment needs to be explored with the accused and his defence lawyer, Alan Stanwick.

Canadian law is clear when it comes to entering a guilty plea and a judge will ask accused persons certain questions prior to accepting such a plea. The court will inquire as to whether the plea is free and voluntary and that the accused admits to the essential elements of the offence.

As a result, all sides are to return to court May 14 for a status report concerning the plea. Should MacLellan decide to change his plea, he will have to make application to the court and hearing will be held.

Meanwhile, in a separate ruling, Murray said should MacLellan proceed to sentence, he will not be subject to the mandatory minimum sentence of one-year in jail. The judge ruled the penalty would be grossly disproportionate given the gravity of the offence.