and Liam Moody v The Queen - [2014] VSCA 349

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

S APCR 2014 0267
LIAM MOODY	Applicant
v
THE QUEEN	Respondent

---

JUDGES:	REDLICH and BEACH JJA
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING:	18 December 2014
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	18 December 2014
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VSCA 349
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM:	DPP v Moody (Unreported, County Court of Victoria, Judge Chettle, 2 December 2014)

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Application for leave to appeal against sentence – Recklessly causing injury – Whether sentence manifestly excessive – Contested plea hearing – Remorse – No prior convictions – Good work history – Prospects of rehabilitation – No error in sentencing process – Sentence of three month’s imprisonment together with 12 month community corrections order not manifestly excessive – Application for leave to appeal refused.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr J P Dickinson QC	Balot Reilly
For the Respondent	Mr D A Trapnell QC	Mr C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

REDLICH JA
BEACH JA:

Introduction

On 23 April 2014, the applicant pleaded guilty in the Magistrates’ Court to one charge of recklessly causing injury. After a plea hearing, the applicant was fined $1,500 without conviction. The maximum term of imprisonment for recklessly causing injury, in the circumstances of this case, is two years.[1] Pursuant to s 257 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009, the Director of Public Prosecutions appealed to the County Court against the sentence imposed by the Magistrates’ Court.
[1]See s 18 of the Crimes Act 1958, s 113 of the Sentencing Act 1991 and s 259(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009.

The Director’s appeal was heard by a judge of the County Court on 1 and 2 December 2014. On 2 December, the judge set aside the Magistrates’ Court order and sentenced the applicant to a term of imprisonment for three months. Additionally, the judge ordered the applicant to serve a 12 month community corrections order, with a condition that he perform 200 hours of unpaid community work over the course of that 12 months, and that the applicant undergo programmes or courses aimed at addressing factors relating to his offending. The judge ordered that the community corrections order commence upon completion of the term of imprisonment imposed.

Pursuant to s 283 of the CriminalProcedureAct, the applicant seeks leave to appeal to this Court against the sentence imposed by the judge in the County Court. The applicant’s proposed grounds are as follows:
1. The sentence is manifestly excessive.
2. The sentence is not an appropriate sentence.
3.The learned sentencing judge erred in his assessment of the applicant’s remorse.
4.The learned sentencing judge erred in treating the proceedings as a ‘contested’ hearing when in truth what was being sought to be established was a clarification of the events by an examination of the CCTV footage of the incident.
5.The learned sentencing judge erred in treating the applicant’s account given to police as an aggravating factor.
6.The learned sentencing judge erred in failing…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading and Liam Moody v The Queen

Details

AGLC: and Liam Moody v The Queen [2014] VSCA 349
Case: [2014] VSCA 349
Decision Date: 18 December 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Liam Moody has applied for leave to appeal against his sentence in relation to a charge of recklessly causing injury. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia. The core issue for the court was whether the sentence of three months' imprisonment, along with a 12-month community corrections order, was manifestly excessive. This question was considered in light of the principles governing sentencing, including the need for a sentence to be proportionate to the offence, to deter the offender and others from committing similar offences, and to promote the offender's rehabilitation.

The court reviewed the sentencing process undertaken by the trial judge and assessed the circumstances of the offence, the defendant's background, and the mitigating factors presented. The court found that the trial judge had appropriately considered the defendant's remorse, lack of prior convictions, good work history, and prospects for rehabilitation. The court concluded that the sentence was within the range of appropriate penalties for the offence and did not constitute a manifest excess. Given this, the court determined that there was no error in the sentencing process that would warrant leave to appeal.

Consequently, the court refused the application for leave to appeal. The sentence of three months' imprisonment together with a 12-month community corrections order was upheld as appropriate and proportionate to the offence committed. The decision underscores the importance of considering all relevant factors in sentencing and the high threshold for finding a sentence manifestly excessive.

Orders