DODD -v- THE QUEEN [2002] WASCA 55
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2002] WASCA 55 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:92/2001 | 21 FEBRUARY 2002 | |
| Coram: | WALLWORK J WHEELER J MILLER J | 15/03/02 | |
| 22 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal against conviction dismissed Applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | PETER GEOFFREY DODD THE QUEEN GREGORY JAMES KING PETA NARELLE HARRIS |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Conspiracy to manufacture methylamphetamine Whether evidence sufficient to support conviction Turns on own facts Criminal law Sentencing Whether 6 years' imprisonment manifestly excessive Relevance of drug that could have been produced Prior good character of applicants |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Ahern v R (1988) 165 CLR 87 Cabassi v The Queen [2000] WASCA 305 Christianos v The Queen [2000] WASCA 184 Etrelezis v The Queen [2001] WASCA 327 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 Nobes v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980097; 5 March 1998 Poyner v R (1986) 17 A Crim R 162 Punevski v The Queen [2000] WASCA 71 Savvas v The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 1 Schuster v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970180; 23 April 1997 Shepherd v The Queen (No 5) (1990) 170 CLR 573 Taouk v R (1992) 65 A Crim R 387 Townsend v The Queen [2001] WASCA 249 Wong v The Queen (2001) 76 ALJR 79 Bellissimo v R (1996) 84 A Crim R 465 Darwell v R (1997) 94 A Crim R 35 Dinsdale v R (2000) 175 ALR 315 Jones v The Queen (1997) 72 ALJR 78 Lim v The Queen [1999] WASCA 296 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 Paparone v The Queen [2000] WASCA 127 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 R v Grein [1989] WAR 178 The Queen v Kane [1975] VR 658 Veneziani v The Queen [2001] WASCA 246 Watt v The Queen [2000] WASCA 354 Worth v The Queen [2001] WASCA 303 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : DODD -v- THE QUEEN [2002] WASCA 55 CORAM : WALLWORK J
- WHEELER J
MILLER J
- CCA 118 of 2001
- Appellant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
- Applicant
(Page 2)
- AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Conspiracy to manufacture methylamphetamine - Whether evidence sufficient to support conviction - Turns on own facts
Criminal law - Sentencing - Whether 6 years' imprisonment manifestly excessive - Relevance of drug that could have been produced - Prior good character of applicants
Legislation:
Nil
Result:
Appeal against conviction…
Continue reading Dodd v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Dodd v The Queen [2002] WASCA 55
- Case
- [2002] WASCA 55
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appellants were convicted of conspiracy to manufacture methylamphetamine, and they sought to appeal their convictions and sentences. The case involved the application of the principles of criminal law to determine whether the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive. The appellants argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove their involvement in the conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt, and that the sentences were excessively harsh given the potential amount of methylamphetamine that could have been produced and their prior good character. The central legal issues revolved around the interpretation of the evidence presented in the trial and the appropriate application of sentencing principles.
The court examined the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions and concluded that the evidence, when viewed in its entirety, was sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that the appellants were involved in the conspiracy. The court found that the evidence, including witness testimonies, phone records, and other circumstantial evidence, was sufficient to establish the conspiracy and the appellants' roles within it. Regarding the sentences, the court held that the sentences were not manifestly excessive. It noted the seriousness of the offence and the potential harm that could have resulted from the production of the methylamphetamine. The court also considered the appellants' prior good character but found that it did not warrant a significantly reduced sentence.
In light of the above, the appeal against the convictions was dismissed, and the applications for leave to appeal against the sentences were refused. The court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the sentences were appropriate given the circumstances of the case. The court emphasised the importance of considering the potential harm and the appellants' roles in the conspiracy when determining the appropriate sentence. The final orders of the court were that the appeal against the convictions was dismissed, and the applications for leave to appeal against the sentences were refused.
The court examined the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions and concluded that the evidence, when viewed in its entirety, was sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that the appellants were involved in the conspiracy. The court found that the evidence, including witness testimonies, phone records, and other circumstantial evidence, was sufficient to establish the conspiracy and the appellants' roles within it. Regarding the sentences, the court held that the sentences were not manifestly excessive. It noted the seriousness of the offence and the potential harm that could have resulted from the production of the methylamphetamine. The court also considered the appellants' prior good character but found that it did not warrant a significantly reduced sentence.
In light of the above, the appeal against the convictions was dismissed, and the applications for leave to appeal against the sentences were refused. The court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the sentences were appropriate given the circumstances of the case. The court emphasised the importance of considering the potential harm and the appellants' roles in the conspiracy when determining the appropriate sentence. The final orders of the court were that the appeal against the convictions was dismissed, and the applications for leave to appeal against the sentences were refused.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal against conviction dismissed
Applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused
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.