Crossley v Cole

Case [2006] WASC 43


CROSSLEY -v- COLE [2006] WASC 43



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2006] WASC 43
Case No:SJA:1093/200530 JANUARY 2006
Coram:SIMMONDS J15/03/06
18Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Appeal dismissed
B
PDF Version
Parties:DEAN PETER CROSSLEY
PAULINE COLE

Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure
Sentencing
Breach of police order
Assaulting a public officer
Previous criminal history
Counsel unaware of suspended imprisonment order
Counsel failed to request adjournment
Unlikely to affect the outcome of the sentencing process
Whether undue weight given to seriousness of offence
Whether alternatives to imprisonment considered
Whether mitigating factors weighed

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 8(1)(b)
Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 35(1), s 80

Case References:

Ali v The Queen (2005) 79 ALJR 662
Allen v Gittos (1995) 13 WAR 560
Bessell v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980199; 4 March 1998
Cox v Whitehead & Ors [1999] WASCA 277
Crossley v Cole [2005] WASC 249
Dangerfield v Commissioner of Police [2000] WASCA 375
Furtak v Timmers [2001] WASCA 65
Hall v The Queen [1999] WASCA 225
James v The Queen [2000] WASCA 100
Kelly v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 950245; 19 May 1995
McSwan v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 128
Mustafa v The Queen [2001] WASCA 192
R v Juric [2003] QCA 132
TKWJ v The Queen (2002) 212 CLR 124
Warrell v Kay (1995) 83 A Crim R 493
White v Taylor [2001] WASCA 350

Cunningham v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 4003; 4 December 1980
Dao v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980152; 22 January 1999
Delacey v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 7687; 31 May 1989
King v Power, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 930289; 27 May 1993
Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665
Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295
R v Gallagher (1998) 2 VLR 671
R v Holcroft [1997] 2 Qd R 392
R v Marston (1993) 60 SASR 320

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    IN CIVIL
CITATION : CROSSLEY -v- COLE [2006] WASC 43 CORAM : SIMMONDS J HEARD : 30 JANUARY 2006 DELIVERED : 15 MARCH 2006 FILE NO/S : SJA 1093 of 2005 BETWEEN : DEAN PETER CROSSLEY
    Appellant

    AND

    PAULINE COLE
    Respondent


ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MAGISTRATE M D WHEELER

File No : JO 4735 of 2005, JO 7130 of 2005





Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Breach of police order - Assaulting a public officer - Previous criminal history - Counsel unaware of suspended imprisonment order - Counsel failed to request adjournment - Unlikely to affect the outcome of the sentencing process - Whether undue weight given to seriousness of offence - Whether alternatives to imprisonment considered - Whether mitigating factors weighed



(Page 2)

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s…

Continue reading Crossley v Cole

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Crossley v Cole [2006] WASC 43
Case
[2006] WASC 43
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal in this case is from the sentences imposed by Magistrate Wheeler at the Magistrates Court of Western Australia. The appellant, Dean Peter Crossley, was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for the offence of assaulting a police officer and a fine for the offence of breaching a police order. The respondent, Pauline Cole, is the state director of public prosecutions. The appeal raises two issues. The first concerns whether there was a miscarriage of justice due to the appellant's counsel not being aware of the existence of a suspended imprisonment order. The second concerns whether the learned Magistrate erred in the imposition of a term of imprisonment for the offence of assaulting a police officer by giving undue weight to the seriousness of the offence, failing to consider alternative dispositions to imprisonment, and failing to give sufficient weight to mitigating factors. The appeal was dismissed. In relation to the first issue, the court found that while there was a material irregularity in the solicitor's failure to seek a short adjournment for the purposes of seeking further instructions from his client, it was unlikely that this irregularity affected the outcome of the sentencing process. In relation to the second issue, the court found that while the sentence imposed was at the higher end of the scale, it was not so high as to be outside the exercise of appropriate sentencing discretion or to indicate undue weight had been given to the nature of the offence. The court also found that the learned Magistrate had taken into account the mitigating circumstances for the offender and that the requirements of s 35(1) of the Sentencing Act had been met.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.