Sentencing — suppression — three strikes — R v AM (CA27/2009) [2010] NZCA 114, [2010] 2 NZLR 750 — Criminal Procedure Act 2011, ss 203 & 205. The defendant appeared for sentencing after pleading guilty to three charges of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection and one charge of indecent assault. In coming to a starting point, the Judge considered the nature and intrusiveness of the offending, the frequency of the violations, the age of the victim (12-13), the significant breach of trust and the impact on victim. Also considered were the purposes and principles of sentencing, which are to denounce the conduct, provide deterrence, and to retain consistency with other sentencing cases. A starting point of 5 years and 3 months' imprisonment was adopted, falling within band 2 of R v AM. This starting point was discounted because of the defendant's remorse and early guilty plea, which saved the victim from the re-victimisation of a trial. The sentence was reduced to 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment. The Judge also had to consider the issue of name suppression. Usually in these types of cases the defendant's name would be suppressed in order to protect the victim from identification. However, the victim wished for the defendant's name to be published so the public would know the defendant committed the serious offences. The Judge respected the victim's wishes; therefore the defendant's name was allowed to be published, but the victim's name, any relationship with the defendant and some submission details were suppressed. Finally, it was found that the three strikes law did not apply as it could not retroactively be applied to offending. Judgment Date: 27 April 2018.