BOEKELMAN -v- CHAMBERLAIN [2013] WASC 401
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2013] WASC 401 | |
| Case No: | SJA:1057/2013 | 5 NOVEMBER 2013 | |
| Coram: | EDELMAN J | 5/11/13 | |
| 21 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Application for leave to appeal dismissed | ||
| D | |||
| PDF Version |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CRIMINAL
- Appellant
AND
DAVID PETER CHAMBERLAIN
Respondent
ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram : MAGISTRATE P G MALONE
File No : PE 6228 of 2012
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Appeal against sentence - Whether manifestly excessive - Whether error in accumulating one sentence of assault - Conflicting assertions concerning facts - Whether appellant sentenced on the basis of disputed facts
Legislation:
Criminal Code 1913 (WA)
Result:
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Category: D
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : In person
Respondent : Ms G Cleary
Solicitors:
Appellant : In person
Respondent : Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)
Cases referred to in judgment:
Birch v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASCA 101
Borbil v The State of Western Australia [2007] WASCA 24
Brady v The State of Western Australia [2013] WASCA 253
Chan v The Queen (1989) 38 A Crim R 337
Closter v Humphreys [2012] WASC 145
Dickens v The Queen [2004] WASCA 179
Downey v The State of Western Australia [2012] WASCA 55
Continue reading Boekelman v Chamberlain
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- BOEKELMAN -v- CHAMBERLAIN [2013] WASC 401
- Case
- [2013] WASC 401
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Boekelman v Chamberlain involved the appellant, Boekelman, appealing against a sentence handed down by the lower court. The dispute centred around the severity of the sentence and the process by which it was determined, particularly focusing on the accumulation of sentences for multiple instances of assault. The matter was brought before the court for review to determine whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and if there was an error in the accumulation of one of the assault sentences. Additionally, conflicting assertions concerning the facts of the case needed to be resolved to ascertain whether Boekelman was sentenced based on disputed facts.
The legal issues before the court included whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, whether there was an error in accumulating one of the assault sentences, and whether the appellant was sentenced based on disputed facts. The court needed to consider the principles of sentencing and the applicable legal standards in making its determination. The court also had to address the conflicting factual assertions to ensure that Boekelman was not sentenced based on unreliable or disputed facts.
The court found that there was no error in the accumulation of the assault sentences and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The conflicting assertions concerning the facts did not result in Boekelman being sentenced on the basis of disputed facts. Therefore, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed. The court upheld the lower court's decision and found that the sentence was appropriate and lawful, based on the evidence and facts presented in the case.
The legal issues before the court included whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, whether there was an error in accumulating one of the assault sentences, and whether the appellant was sentenced based on disputed facts. The court needed to consider the principles of sentencing and the applicable legal standards in making its determination. The court also had to address the conflicting factual assertions to ensure that Boekelman was not sentenced based on unreliable or disputed facts.
The court found that there was no error in the accumulation of the assault sentences and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The conflicting assertions concerning the facts did not result in Boekelman being sentenced on the basis of disputed facts. Therefore, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed. The court upheld the lower court's decision and found that the sentence was appropriate and lawful, based on the evidence and facts presented in the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for leave to appeal 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.