Bryant v The Queen
[2000] WASCA 226
•24 AUGUST 2000
BRYANT -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 226
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2000] WASCA 226 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:36/2000 | 1 AUGUST 2000 | |
| Coram: | IPP J WALLWORK J PARKER J | 24/08/00 | |
| 5 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed, 11 year total sentence reduced to 9-1/2 year sentence | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | PETER JOHN BRYANT THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Sentencing Armed robbery 21 year old offender Drug user Two offences Sentenced to 5-1/2 years imprisonment on each To be served cumulatively |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Armstrong v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980231; 21 April 1998 Eldridge v The Queen [2000] WASCA 41 Ginn v The Queen [2000] WASCA 95 Miles v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 970258; 21 May 1997 Riley v The Queen [2000] WASCA 111 Goddard v The Queen [1999] WASCA 281 Jarvis v The Queen (1998) 20 WAR 201 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Pratt v The Queen [2000] WASCA 110 Puls v The Queen [2000] WASCA 11 Robertson v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990130; 19 March 1999 Taylor v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980152; 6 April 1998 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : BRYANT -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 226 CORAM : IPP J
- WALLWORK J
PARKER J
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Sentencing - Armed robbery - 21 year old offender - Drug user - Two offences - Sentenced to 5-1/2 years imprisonment on each - To be served cumulatively
Legislation:
Nil
Result:
Appeal allowed, 11 year total sentence reduced to 9-1/2 year sentence
(Page 2)
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Mr R D Young
Respondent : Mr J R N Rowe
Solicitors:
Applicant : Gunning
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Armstrong v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980231; 21 April 1998
Eldridge v The Queen [2000] WASCA 41
Ginn v The Queen [2000] WASCA 95
Miles v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 970258; 21 May 1997
Riley v The Queen [2000] WASCA 111
Case(s) also cited:
Goddard v The Queen [1999] WASCA 281
Jarvis v The Queen (1998) 20 WAR 201
Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59
Pratt v The Queen [2000] WASCA 110
Puls v The Queen [2000] WASCA 11
Robertson v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990130; 19 March 1999
Taylor v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980152; 6 April 1998
(Page 3)
1 IPP J: I agree with the reasons of Wallwork J and have nothing further to add.
2 WALLWORK J: On 11 February 2000 the applicant was sentenced to an effective aggregate term of 11 years' imprisonment in the Supreme Court at Perth. That sentence was comprised of four sentences for four different offences. Those offences were two offences of armed robbery in company and two offences of stealing motor vehicles.
3 The applicant was sentenced to 5-1/2 years' imprisonment for each of the armed robbery offences. Those sentences were ordered to be served cumulatively. He was also sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for each of the car stealing offences. Those sentences were ordered to be served concurrently with the sentences for the armed robberies.
4 In his sentencing remarks, the learned Judge stated that on 1 June 1999 at Maddington, the applicant had stolen a Ford Meteor sedan. On the same day he had stolen with actual violence money and drugs from a pharmacy. At that time he was armed with a knife and he was in company with another person. Each of the offenders were wearing balaclavas and carrying a large knife in each hand. The staff at the pharmacy were threatened. A knife was waved in the face of the owner/operator of the pharmacy. The offenders took the tape from a surveillance video camera, money, drugs and credit cards.
5 Ten days later, on 11 June 1999, the applicant stole a Mazda utility truck. On the same day, in company with a different accomplice, he again entered a pharmacy. The offenders had a shotgun and a large knife. Staff and female customers were threatened. A female customer was forced at gunpoint to lie on the floor. The pharmacist was threatened with a shotgun and ordered to open the safe. The accomplice stood over the customers with the large knife. The applicant stole cash to the value of $6,551.80. The offenders then drove away in the stolen vehicle.
6 His Honour was told by the counsel for the prosecution that during the course of the first robbery the applicant had shouted threats to kill the staff and had brandished the knife that he had in his possession. $12,000 in cash and drugs had been taken on that occasion. On the second occasion, his Honour accepted that it had been the co-offender who was carrying the shotgun. The applicant had a knife. The co-offender had brandished the gun at a female shop assistant who had been six to seven months pregnant at the time.
(Page 4)
7 The co-offender, on the second robbery, had been sentenced to a term of 5-1/2 years' imprisonment for the robbery and to a further 1 year's imprisonment for two offences of stealing motor vehicles, one of which involved the vehicle used in the robbery.
8 The learned Judge was told that the applicant had two sisters. Neither his sisters nor his parents had ever been in trouble with the law. Apparently the applicant had had a stable upbringing. However, when he had left school at the age of 14, he had only had two very short part-time jobs. He had begun associating with an older peer group, who were using drugs, stealing cars and breaking into houses. By 16 years of age, he was using heroin quite heavily. Prior to these offences, he had been released from prison on parole and had said he was determined to abide by the law. However he had met his friends again and recommenced using heroin. It was because of the need for about $600 a day for drugs that he had committed the robbery offences.
9 At the time of the offences the applicant was 21 years of age. He had an extensive record in the Children's Court, commencing when he was 14 years of age. That record included offences for assault occasioning bodily harm; burglary; assault; resisting arrest; stealing motor vehicles; stealing; escaping legal custody; threatening behaviour; assaulting a public officer; going armed so as to cause fear; and other traffic and drug offences. Since he has been an adult, the applicant has been convicted of various traffic offences, including driving under suspension. He has also been convicted of using amphetamines; burglary; stealing; loitering; and escaping legal custody. He has served terms of imprisonment as an adult.
10 The learned Judge said that the applicant's conduct must have occasioned extreme distress to the victims. The use of weapons such as a large knife and a shotgun were very serious aspects of the offences. His Honour said that the applicant had pleaded guilty to the offences, although not on the fast-track. Because of the plea of guilty, he had reduced the sentences, which he would otherwise have imposed. He said that taking into account the principle of totality, the stealing offences would be served concurrently with the other sentences but the two 5-1/2 year sentences of imprisonment for the armed robberies in company would be made cumulative but concurrent with whatever sentence the applicant was then serving.
11 The ground of the application for leave to appeal was in essence that the total sentence of 11 years was too long in all the circumstances, having regard to the relatively young age of the offender and the
(Page 5)
submission that the total of 11 years' imprisonment was commensurate with sentences which had been imposed in other cases where there had been more offences committed. For example, reference was made to a decision in Armstrong v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980231; 21 April 1998, where a sentence of 11 years and 4 months' imprisonment, without parole, had been imposed for seven armed robbery offences in company; 17 attempted armed robbery in company and four stealing motor vehicles offences. Reference was made to the decision in Ginn v The Queen [2000] WASCA 95 where the offender received a sentence of 11 years and 6 months' imprisonment for three armed robberies and one attempted armed robbery, which had all been committed on banks. Another decision referred to was Eldridge v The Queen [2000] WASCA 41 where a sentence of 12 years' imprisonment had been imposed on a 22-year old offender who had been convicted of seven armed robberies and two armed robberies in company. All of those offences had been committed on pharmacies. Another decision was Riley v The Queen [2000] WASCA 111 where a 28-year old offender had been sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment for two attempted armed robberies in company and three armed robbery offences. By contrast, there had been the decision in Miles v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 970258; 21 May 1997 where a 24-year old offender with a minor record, who had committed two armed robberies with a blood-filled syringe had received 6 years' imprisonment.
12 It is my view that, having regard to other sentences which have been imposed in the Supreme Court in Western Australia, the 11 year effective term of imprisonment in this case was too severe. In all the circumstances, and having regard to the totality principle, I would grant leave to appeal, allow the appeal and reduce the second cumulative 5-1/2 year term to one of 4 years' imprisonment, making an effective 9-1/2 year sentence for the two armed robberies. The two 1 year sentences for the stealing of the motor vehicles would remain the same and would be served concurrently with the aggregate 9-1/2 year sentence. The applicant would be eligible for parole.
13 PARKER J: I agree with what has been said by Wallwork J and with the orders he proposes.
9
1