CHINNERY -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 295
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2000] WASCA 295 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:210/1999 | 17 APRIL 2000 | |
| Coram: | MALCOLM CJ KENNEDY J MURRAY J | 18/10/00 | |
| 11 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Extension of time granted Application for leave to appeal granted Appeal allowedSentence quashed Sentence of 6 years imprisonment substituted | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | MICHAEL JOHN CHINNERY THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Sexual penetration of applicant's de facto child 8 years' imprisonment imposed Whether sentence manifestly excessive Whether sufficient credit given for fast track plea of guilty Turns on own facts |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Hodder v The Queen (1995) 15 WAR 264 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 R v Pinder (1992) 8 WAR 19 R v Podirsky (1989) 43 A Crim R 404 Trescuri v The Queen [1999] WASCA 172 Verschuren v The Queen (1995) 17 WAR 467 Woods v The Queen (1995) 14 WAR 341 Honeybone v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960430; 7 June 1996 Johnston v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960153; 22 March 1996 Mesiti v The Queen [1999] WASCA 76 Moulds v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980147; 4 March 1998 R v Arnold (1991) 56 A Crim R 63 R v CW [2000] WASCA 81 R v Richards [1999] WASCA 105 Wong v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980218; 2 April 1998 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : CHINNERY -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 295 CORAM : MALCOLM CJ
- KENNEDY J
MURRAY J
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Sexual penetration of applicant's de facto child - 8 years' imprisonment imposed - Whether sentence manifestly excessive - Whether sufficient credit given for fast track plea of guilty - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Nil
(Page 2)
Result:
Extension of time granted
Application for leave to appeal granted
Appeal allowed
Sentence quashed
Sentence of 6 years imprisonment substituted
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Mr D P Moen
Respondent : Mr R E Cock QC
Solicitors:
Applicant : Andree Horrigan
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Hodder v The Queen (1995) 15 WAR 264
Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665
R v Pinder (1992) 8 WAR 19
R v Podirsky (1989) 43 A Crim R 404
Trescuri v The Queen [1999] WASCA 172
Verschuren v The Queen (1995) 17 WAR 467
Woods v The Queen (1995) 14 WAR 341
Case(s) also cited:
Honeybone v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960430; 7 June 1996
Johnston v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960153;…
Continue reading Chinnery v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Chinnery v The Queen [2000] WASCA 295
- Case
- [2000] WASCA 295
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this case, the appellant, Chinnery, appealed against his conviction and sentence for sexual penetration of his de facto child. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia. The central issue before the court was whether the original sentence of eight years' imprisonment was manifestly excessive and whether the trial judge had given sufficient credit for Chinnery's fast track plea of guilty. The case hinged on the unique facts of the case and whether the trial judge had appropriately balanced the various sentencing considerations.
The court examined the trial judge's reasons and found that there was an error in the application of sentencing principles. The trial judge had not given sufficient weight to the principles of proportionality and deterrence in relation to the fast track plea of guilty. Additionally, the court found that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive in light of the mitigating factors present in the case, including the appellant's early guilty plea and the absence of any significant aggravating factors.
Consequently, the High Court quashed the original sentence and substituted a sentence of six years' imprisonment. The court also granted an extension of time and leave to appeal. The decision highlights the importance of appropriately balancing sentencing considerations and ensuring that credit is given for a fast track plea of guilty. It also serves as a reminder that sentences should be proportionate to the crime and the circumstances of the case.
The court examined the trial judge's reasons and found that there was an error in the application of sentencing principles. The trial judge had not given sufficient weight to the principles of proportionality and deterrence in relation to the fast track plea of guilty. Additionally, the court found that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive in light of the mitigating factors present in the case, including the appellant's early guilty plea and the absence of any significant aggravating factors.
Consequently, the High Court quashed the original sentence and substituted a sentence of six years' imprisonment. The court also granted an extension of time and leave to appeal. The decision highlights the importance of appropriately balancing sentencing considerations and ensuring that credit is given for a fast track plea of guilty. It also serves as a reminder that sentences should be proportionate to the crime and the circumstances of the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Extension of time granted
Application for leave to appeal granted
Appeal allowedSentence quashed
Sentence of 6 years imprisonment substituted
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.