COLBUNG -v- THE QUEEN [1999] WASCA 138
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [1999] WASCA 138 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:101/1999 | 4 AUGUST 1999 | |
| Coram: | ANDERSON J WHITE J HEENAN J | 20/08/99 | |
| 9 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed. | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | BRIAN NATHAN COLBUNG THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Series of offences Aggravated stealing of motor vehicle one of offences Appropriate tariff Overall sentence of six years imprisonment not excessive |
Legislation: | The Criminal Code s 378(2)(a) |
Case References: | Bropho v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940197; 14 April 1994 R v Mills [1998] 4 VR 235 R v Smith [1964] Crim LR 70 Rogers & Murray v The Queen (1989) 44 A Crim R 301 Australian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation v Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621 Evagora v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960417; 5 August 1996 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howard v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960638; 7 November 1996 Jarvis v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 930341; 14 June 1993 Miles v The Queen (1997) 17 WAR 518 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Pezzino v The Queen (1997) 92 A Crim R 135 Rankins v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940669; 1 December 1994 Shaw v The Queen (1989) 39 A Crim R 343 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 77 ALR 385 Weng Keong Chan v The Queen (1989) 38 A Crim R 337 Yarran v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960556; 4 April 1996 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : COLBUNG -v- THE QUEEN [1999] WASCA 138 CORAM : ANDERSON J
- WHITE J
HEENAN J
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Series of offences - Aggravated stealing of motor vehicle one of offences - Appropriate tariff - Overall sentence of six years imprisonment not excessive
Legislation:
The Criminal Code s 378(2)(a)
Result:
Leave to appeal granted.
- Appeal dismissed.
(Page 2)
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Mr D Hore-Lacy QC
Respondent : Mr R E Cock QC & Ms E A Benwell
Solicitors:
Applicant : Aboriginal Legal Service of WA (Inc)
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Bropho v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940197; 14 April 1994
R v Mills [1998] 4 VR 235
R v Smith [1964] Crim LR 70
Rogers & Murray v The Queen (1989) 44 A Crim R 301
Case(s) also cited:
Australian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation v Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621
Evagora v The Queen, unreported;…
Continue reading Colbung v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Colbung v The Queen [1999] WASCA 138
- Case
- [1999] WASCA 138
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Colbung v The Queen, the High Court of Australia was tasked with assessing the sentence imposed on the appellant for a series of offences, including aggravated stealing of a motor vehicle. The appellant, Colbung, appealed against the sentence of six years imprisonment, arguing that it was excessive. The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the overall sentence was appropriate in light of the totality of the offences and the principles of sentencing.
The Court considered the nature and seriousness of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, and the principles of deterrence, rehabilitation, and denunciation. It was noted that the appellant had a history of offending, which included serious crimes such as aggravated stealing. The Court found that the sentence was proportionate to the gravity of the offences committed, taking into account the need to protect the community and deter future offending. The Court further determined that the sentence reflected an appropriate balance between punishment and rehabilitation.
In conclusion, the High Court found that the sentence of six years imprisonment was not excessive. The appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal was granted to allow the appellant to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court. The Court's decision underscores the importance of considering the totality of an offender's criminal history and the principles of sentencing in determining an appropriate sentence.
The Court considered the nature and seriousness of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, and the principles of deterrence, rehabilitation, and denunciation. It was noted that the appellant had a history of offending, which included serious crimes such as aggravated stealing. The Court found that the sentence was proportionate to the gravity of the offences committed, taking into account the need to protect the community and deter future offending. The Court further determined that the sentence reflected an appropriate balance between punishment and rehabilitation.
In conclusion, the High Court found that the sentence of six years imprisonment was not excessive. The appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal was granted to allow the appellant to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court. The Court's decision underscores the importance of considering the totality of an offender's criminal history and the principles of sentencing in determining an appropriate sentence.
Orders
Orders of the court
Leave to appeal granted.
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.