Adcock v QPS

[2021] QDC 116

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Adcock v QPS [2021] QDC 116

PARTIES:

TYNE MARIE ADCOCK

(Appellant)
v

QUEENSLAND POLICE SERVICE

(Respondent)

FILE NO:

Appeal No 54/21

DIVISION:

Appellate

PROCEEDING:

Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Magistrates Court, Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

11 June 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Innisfail

HEARING DATE:

4 June 2021

JUDGE:

Morzone QC DCJ

ORDER:

1.   Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW - appeal pursuant to s 222 Justices Act 1886 - conviction – serious assault police officer, wilful damage, disobedience, obstruct police and bail offences – whether undue weight given to criminal history - whether effective sentence of 9 month imprisonment to serve one third before release on parole is manifestly excessive.

LEGISLATION:

Justices Act 1886 (Qld) s 222, s 223 & 227
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) s 9

CASES:

Allesch v Maunz (2000) 203 CLR 172
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
Kentwell v R (2014) 252 CLR 60
Lovell v Lovell (1950) 81 CLR 513
Mill v The Queen [1988] 166 CLR 59
R v Casiotis [2006] QCA 85
R v Morse (1979) 23 SASR 98
The Queen v Crofts [1999] 1 Qd R 386
Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465
White v Commissioner of Police [2014] QCA 12

COUNSEL:

K Goodwin for the Appellant

A Dunkerton for the Respondent

SOLICITORS:

Osborne Butler Lawyers for the Appellant

The Office of Director of Public Prosecutions for the Respondent.

Introduction

1. On 29 March 2021, the appellant was convicted after a plea of guilty in the Magistrates Court held in Cairns, of 15 offences including serious assault police officer, wilful damage, disobedience, obstruct police and bail offences.  The court imposed concurrent sentences with an effective sentence of nine months imprisonment with a parole release date after serving three months in prison.  

2. The appellant now appeals the head sentence on the grounds that it is manifestly excessive, in particular, nine months imprisonment for charge 5, serious assault police committed on 16 April 2020 and six months imprisonment for charge 7 being another serious assault police committed on 28/05/2020.  The appellant argues that the sentencing Magistrate misapplied the comparative authorities and inflated the gravity of the appellant’s criminal history to reach a manifestly excessive sentence.  Notwithstanding the submission below, she now contends that the sentence should not exceed six months.

3. The respondent opposes the appeal.

4. Whilst the overall effective sentence of nine months with three months actual imprisonment before release on parole is harsh, it is at the high end of the permissible range and not demonstrably manifestly excessive.  It seems to me that the sentencing court took proper account of the appellant’s criminal history and matters of totality when considering the comparative cases. 

5. For these reasons, I dismiss the appeal against sentence.

   Appeal against sentence

6. The appellant appeals pursuant to s 222 of the Justices Act 1886 (Qld). Pursuant to s 223 of the Act, the appeal is by way of rehearing on the original evidence. However, the District…