CHRISTOPHER JOHN COGGAN v THE QUEEN
[2013] ACTCA 49 (30 October 2013)
APPEAL – Appeal against sentence – whether non-parole period too long having regard to appellant’s responsibility for children – consideration of appellant’s criminal record – significance of sentences in other jurisdictions – significance of burning down of appellant’s house while appellant in custody – whether sufficient discount was given for early pleas of guilty – utilitarian value of early plea of guilty – acknowledgment of benefits of early plea of guilty on criminal justice system – excessively rigorous approach may increase defended trials if no perceived benefit to offender in late plea of guilty – higher discount should have been provided – appeal upheld – appellant re-sentenced.
Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 33(1)(o), 35(4)
Holliday v The Queen [2013] ACTCA 31
R v Howard (sentencing remarks, SCC 267 of 2010, 22 November 2012)
Taylor v Bowden [2009] ACTSC 13
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
No. ACTCA 5 – 2013
No. SCC 76 of 2012
Judge: Murrell CJ, Refshauge and Penfold JJ
Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory
Date: 30 October 2013
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. ACTCA 5 – 2013
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY ) No. SCC 76 of 2012
)
COURT OF APPEAL )
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
BETWEEN:CHRISTOPHER JOHN COGGAN
Appellant
AND:THE QUEEN
Respondent
ORDER
Judge: Murrell CJ, Refshauge and Penfold JJ
Date: 30 October 2013
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The appeal is upheld.
The sentence of the trial judge is set aside.
The appellant is re-sentenced as follows:
(a) the 3-month previously suspended sentence is imposed in full;
(b) for the first burglary and associated theft, the appellant is sentenced to 19 months and 7 months imprisonment respectively, to be served concurrently and fully accumulated on the 3-month sentence;
(c) for the second burglary and associated theft, the appellant is sentenced to 24 months and 14 months imprisonment respectively, to be served concurrently with each other and accumulated so as to add 11 months to the total sentence;
(d) for the third burglary, the attempted theft and the going equipped offence, the appellant is sentenced to 32 months, 10 months and 6 months imprisonment respectively, to be served concurrently with each other and accumulated so as to add 21 months to the total sentence.
The total new sentence is 4 years and 6 months imprisonment, backdated to 12 March 2012.
The non-parole period is 32 months, starting on 12 March 2012 and expiring on 11 November 2014.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. ACTCA 5 – 2013
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY ) No. SCC 76 of 2012
)
COURT OF APPEAL )
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
BETWEEN:CHRISTOPHER JOHN COGGAN
Appellant
AND:THE QUEEN
Respondent
Judge: Murrell CJ,…
Continue reading Coggan v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Coggan v The Queen [2013] ACTCA 49
- Case
- [2013] ACTCA 49
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the original sentence was manifestly excessive, particularly in light of the appellant's personal circumstances and the utilitarian value of his early pleas. The court was required to consider the appropriate discount for an early guilty plea, acknowledging its benefits to the criminal justice system and the potential for an overly rigorous approach to discourage such pleas.
The Court of Appeal reasoned that a higher discount for the early pleas of guilty should have been provided by the trial judge. The court found that the original sentence was excessively rigorous and that the utilitarian value of the early pleas had not been sufficiently recognised. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, the original sentence was set aside, and the appellant was re-sentenced. The new sentence comprised a total of 4 years and 6 months imprisonment, backdated to 12 March 2012, with a non-parole period of 32 months.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal is upheld.
2. The sentence of the trial judge is set aside.
3. The appellant is re-sentenced as follows:
(a) the 3-month previously suspended sentence is imposed in full;
(b) for the first burglary and associated theft, the appellant is sentenced to 19 months and 7 months imprisonment respectively, to be served concurrently and fully accumulated on the 3-month sentence;
(c) for the second burglary and associated theft, the appellant is sentenced to 24 months and 14 months imprisonment respectively, to be served concurrently with each other and accumulated so as to add 11 months to the total sentence;
(d) for the third burglary, the attempted theft and the going equipped offence, the appellant is sentenced to 32 months, 10 months and 6 months imprisonment respectively, to be served concurrently with each other and accumulated so as to add 21 months to the total sentence.
4. The total new sentence is 4 years and 6 months imprisonment, backdated to 12 March 2012.
5. The non-parole period is 32 months, starting on 12 March 2012 and expiring on 11 November 2014.
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.