"B" -v- THE QUEEN [2002] WASCA 236
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2002] WASCA 236 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:163/2001 | 26 JULY 2002 | |
| Coram: | MURRAY J TEMPLEMAN J MILLER J | 28/08/02 | |
| 15 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Applications for extension of time dismissed | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | "B" THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Sentencing Offences of having a sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16 years Father of children Four children aged between 3 and 6 years Whether maximum of 20 years' imprisonment appropriate by way of starting point Whether 15 years' imprisonment on each count excessive Total sentence of 20 years not excessive |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Bensegger v R [1979] WAR 65 Cameron v The Queen [2002] WASCA 81 Dempsey v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960059; 9 February 1996 Gavin v The Queen (1992) 6 WAR 195 Jarvis v The Queen (1993) 20 WAR 201 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Woods v The Queen (1994) 14 WAR 341 De Luce v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960735; 19 July 1996 King v The Queen [2001] WASCA 103 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 Miller v The Queen [1999] WASCA 66 R v CW [2000] WASCA 81 R v GP (1997) 93 A Crim R 351 R v Podirsky (1989) 43 A Crim R 404 R v Richards [1999] WASCA 105 R v Western [2001] WASCA 194 Trescuri v The Queen [1999] WASCA 172 Watson v The Queen [2000] WASCA 119 Wicks v The Queen (1989) 3 WAR 372 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : "B" -v- THE QUEEN [2002] WASCA 236 CORAM : MURRAY J
- TEMPLEMAN J
MILLER J
- CCA 164 of 2001
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Sentencing - Offences of having a sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16 years - Father of children - Four children aged between 3 and 6 years - Whether maximum of 20 years' imprisonment appropriate by way of starting point - Whether 15 years' imprisonment on each count excessive - Total sentence of 20 years not excessive
Legislation:
Nil
(Page 2)
Result:
Applications for extension of time dismissed
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : In person
Respondent : Mr D Dempster
Solicitors:
Applicant : Unrepresented Criminal Appellants Scheme
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Bensegger v R [1979] WAR 65
Cameron v The Queen [2002] WASCA 81
Dempsey v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960059; 9 February 1996
Gavin v The Queen (1992) 6 WAR 195
Jarvis v The Queen (1993) 20…
Continue reading B v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- B v The Queen [2002] WASCA 236
- Case
- [2002] WASCA 236
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of B v The Queen involved the appellant, the father of four children aged between 3 and 6 years, who was convicted of offences involving sexual relationships with his children. The appellant appealed against the severity of his sentence, arguing that the maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment was inappropriate as a starting point and that the sentence of 15 years' imprisonment on each count was excessive. The total sentence imposed was 20 years' imprisonment.
The legal issues before the court were whether the maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment was suitable as a starting point for the offences and whether the sentence of 15 years' imprisonment on each count was excessive. The court also needed to consider whether the total sentence of 20 years was appropriate given the nature of the offences and the appellant's relationship to the victims.
The court reviewed the principles of sentencing, particularly the need to consider the gravity of the offences, the appellant's relationship to the victims, and the impact on the children. The court found that the maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment was appropriate as a starting point given the severity of the offences. However, the court noted that while the sentence of 15 years' imprisonment on each count was high, it was not excessive when considering the total impact of the offences and the need for deterrence and denunciation. The court concluded that the total sentence of 20 years was not excessive and reflected the seriousness of the crimes committed.
The legal issues before the court were whether the maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment was suitable as a starting point for the offences and whether the sentence of 15 years' imprisonment on each count was excessive. The court also needed to consider whether the total sentence of 20 years was appropriate given the nature of the offences and the appellant's relationship to the victims.
The court reviewed the principles of sentencing, particularly the need to consider the gravity of the offences, the appellant's relationship to the victims, and the impact on the children. The court found that the maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment was appropriate as a starting point given the severity of the offences. However, the court noted that while the sentence of 15 years' imprisonment on each count was high, it was not excessive when considering the total impact of the offences and the need for deterrence and denunciation. The court concluded that the total sentence of 20 years was not excessive and reflected the seriousness of the crimes committed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Applications for extension of time dismissed
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.