Legal Research
Cases
Fusimalohi v The Queen

Fusimalohi v The Queen

Case [2012] ACTCA 49 12 December 2012

Type to search within this case.

JAMES NELSON FUSIMALOHI v THE QUEEN
[2012] ACTCA 49 (12 December 2012)

APPEAL – Appeal against sentence – Specific error – Mistake of fact – Remorse – Neutral findings – No specific error – Appeal dismissed.

APPEAL – Appeal against sentence – Manifest excess – Offences of burglary and theft – Consistency – Range of appropriate sentences – Sentence within range – Appeal dismissed.

Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 16A(2)(f)
Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), s 33, pt 4.4
Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA), s 10(1)(f)
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9
Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), s 5(2C) and (2B)

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), ss 308, 311, 312, 315

Edney, R, Bagaric, M, Australian Sentencing: Principles and Practice (Cambridge University Press, 2007)
New South Wales Law Reform Commission, Sentencing, Discussion Paper No 33 (1996)

AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111
Alvares v The Queen (2011) 209 A Crim R 297
Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10
Braham (1994) 73 A Crim R 353
Clarke v Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] ACTCA 7
Cranssen v The King (1936) 55 CLR 509
EG v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 17
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
Love v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 8
McGainey v Barac [2008] ACTSC 48
Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59
Neal v The Queen (1982) 149 CLR 305
Richards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10
RR v The Queen [2011] NSWCCA 235
R v Betancur-Galvis (2003) 142 A Crim R 527
R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21
R v Campbell [2010] ACTCA 20
R v Cao (2006) 65 NSWLR 552
R v Dunmall [2008] VSCA 22
R v Healey (2008) 186 A Crim R 433
R v Jabaltjari (1989) 64 NTR 1
R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270
R v Pajic and Bulger (1990) 48 A Crim R 239
R v Pajic (2009) 23 VR 527
R v Relph [2002] ACTCA 6
R v Storey [[1998] 1 VR 359
R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10
R v Trad [2003] NSWCCA 213
R v TW (2011) 6 ACTLR 18
R v Whyte (2004) 7 VR 397
Shore v The Queen (1992) 66 A Crim R 37
Siganto v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 656
Wickey v McVicar [2012] ACTCA 38

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

No. ACTCA 37 - 2011
No. SCC 349 of 2007
No. SCC 386 of 2007
No. SCC 85 of 2008
No. SCC 130 of 2008
No. SC 73 of 2011

Judges: Refshauge, Burns, Lander JJ
Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory
Date: 12 December 2012

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )          No. ACTCA 37 - 2011
)          No. SCC 349 of 2007
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )          No. SCC 386 of 2007
  )          No. SCC 85 of 2008
COURT OF APPEAL  )          No. SCC 130 of 2008
  No. SCC 73 of 2011

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Fusimalohi v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49
Case: [2012] ACTCA 49
Decision Date: 12 December 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Fusimalohi, appealed against a sentence imposed by the District Court for offences of burglary and theft. The appeal was heard by the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Criminal Appeal were whether there was a specific error in the sentencing judge's determination, particularly concerning findings of fact and the assessment of remorse, and whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, considering the nature of the offences and the range of appropriate sentences for similar conduct.

The Court of Criminal Appeal found no specific error in the sentencing judge's findings of fact or assessment of remorse, noting that the findings were neutral and did not demonstrate a mistake of fact. Furthermore, the Court concluded that the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range for the offences of burglary and theft, and therefore not manifestly excessive. The Court applied the principles that an appellate court will only intervene in sentencing if there is a specific error or if the sentence is demonstrably outside the acceptable range.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

The appeal is 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.

Citations

109

AGLC Citation

Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49

Most Recent Citation

Vince v Wickey [2014] ACTSC 258

Cases citing this decision · 50 of 80 shown

Director of Public Prosecutions v Walker (a pseudonym)
[2025] ACTSC 141

…Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; 249 CLR 571 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 R v Stacker [2020] ACTCA 34 R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; 16 VR 269…
R v Merrilees (No 2); Director of Public Prosecutions v Merrilees
[2024] ACTSC 364

…ublic Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 DPP v Le [2024] ACTSC 31 DPP v Wright [2023] ACTSC 196 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Guy v Anderson [2013] ACTSC 5 Hawkins v Hawkins [2009] ACTSC 148; 3 ACTLR 210 Henry v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 5 Taylor v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 9 Higg…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Howe
[2024] ACTSC 178 Para 18

…idence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 at [18]; Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ; Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33 at [44]; Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 at [36]; R v Mumberson [2011] NSWCCA 54 at [38]. 66․This is consistent wit…
DPP v JJ (No 2)
[2024] ACTSC 74

…Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Forster-Jones v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 31 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Guy v Anderson [2013] ACTSC 5 Gyory v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 28 Hall v The Queen; Barker v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 16 Henderson v The King [2024] ACTC…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Manns (No 2)
[2023] ACTSC 405

…erts (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 146 DPP v Stasinos [2023] ACTSC 179 DPP v Trewartha [2023] ACTSC 13 Edwin v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 47 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 GAS v The Queen; SJK v The Queen [2004] HCA 22; 217 CLR 198 Hall v The Queen; Barker v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 16 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242…
DPP v Doughty
[2023] ACTSC 397 Para 18

…ce should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 at [18]; Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ; Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33 at [44]; Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 at [36]; R v Mumberson [2011] NSWCCA 54 at [38]. 85․This is consistent with Im…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Ivanisevic (No 2)
[2023] ACTSC 374

…Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Forster-Jones v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 31 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Goundar v Goddard [2010] ACTSC 56; 240 FLR 176 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4; 243 CLR 506 Lloyd v R [2022] N…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Barrett
[2023] ACTSC 260

…VSCA 2 DPP v Gany [2006] VSCA 148 DPP v Samuel Myers (a pseudonym) [2023] ACTSC 142 Forster-Jones v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 31 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 Lutz v JK [2016] ACTSC 200 Markarian…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Paff
[2023] ACTSC 259

…im R 297 DPP v Crutchett [2023] ACTSC 193 Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4; 243 CLR 506 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 McCullough v The…
R v Middleton
[2023] ACTSC 50

…010] VSCA 215 Director of Public Prosecutions v Latham [2009] TASSC 101 Farache v The Queen [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4; 243 CLR 506 KT v R [2008] NSWCCA 51; 182 A Crim R 571 Markarian v The Queen […
R v March
[2023] ACTSC 28 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45].…
R v Porter (No 3)
[2022] ACTSC 236

…24 A Crim R 201 DPP v DDJ [2009] VSCA 115; 22 VR 444 Einfeld v R [2010] NSWCCA 87; 200 A Crim R 1 Fenner v R [2022] NSWCCA 48 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Gore v R; Hunter v R [2010] NSWCCA 330; 208 A Crim R 353 Hampton v R [2010] NSWCCA 278; 208 A Crim R 478 Henry v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 5 Higgins v T…
R v Ruwhiu
[2022] ACTSC 290 Para 1

…important, being required to be considered by a court sentencing an offender under section 33(1)(w) of the Sentencing Act . In Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [27]–[44], the nature of remorse was considered at some length. There, it was contrasted with self-pity and with contrition. It was accepted that…
R v Cajina
[2021] ACTSC 353 Para 1

…Mr Cajina has taken responsibility for his offending behaviour, and his expressions of remorse, a matter described in Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [28]-[34], were significant, though without much reference to the victims or empathy for them nor addressing their situation. Mr Cajina’s wish to engage in…
R v Weldon
[2021] ACTSC 348

…Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; 249 CLR 571 DPP v Darlington [2014] VCC 1647 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Gilson v The Queen (1991) 172 CLR 353 Lawson v Gault [2002] FCAFC 191; 125 FCR 1 R v Coleman [2021] ACTSC 349 R v Crawford (No 1) [2020] ACTSC 245 R v Dowling (No 2) [2021] ACTSC 200 R v Hancock [20…
R v Goolagong (No 2)
[2021] ACTSC 131 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45].…
R v Snow
[2021] ACTSC 342 Para 15

…79. As to the burglary, it is well known, as stated in Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [15], that, “there is no single correct sentence for offences of burglary and aggravated burglary”. That, of course, applies to all offences, as the High Court has made clear on a number of occasions. 80. Nevertheless,…
R v Massey (No 3)
[2021] ACTSC 156

…[2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 DPP v Vucko [2008] VSCA 270 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 In the Matter of a Bail Application by Rebecca Massey [2008] ACTSC 145 Kelly v Ashby [2015] ACTSC 346; 73 MVR 360 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 RK v Mirik (20…
R v Coleman
[2021] ACTSC 349

…The Queen [2013] HCA 37; 249 CLR 571 Director of Public Prosecutions (Vic) v Dalgliesh (Pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hall v The Queen; Barker v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 16 Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4; 243 CLR 506 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 R v Cra…
R v Collins (No 2)
[2021] ACTSC 262 Para 1

…The entry of the pleas in these circumstances was also evidence of some remorse: see Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [27]-[37]. Mr Collins did not, however, show a great deal of empathy for or insight into the plight of the victims of his offences, so the relevance of remorse is somewhat moderated.…
R v Antonovic (No 3)
[2021] ACTSC 338

…and the Chief Executive of the Department of Justice and Community Safety [2010] ACTSC 151 Boney v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 291 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Gilson v The Queen [1991] HCA 24; 172 CLR 353 Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4; 243 CLR 506 Ibbs v The Queen [1987] HCA 46; 163 CLR 447 O'Brien v The Queen…
R v Appleby
[2021] ACTSC 55

…74; 50 VR 800 DPP v Latham [2009] TASSC 101; 19 Tas R 281 Edwin v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 47 Finley v The Queen [2018] VSCA 202 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144 Lyons v The Queen [2019] VSCA 242 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 22…
R v Foster
[2021] ACTSC 229 Para 1

…of course, allowance has to be made for the statutory identified aggravating elements for the more serious offence: see, for example, Fusimalohi v R [2012] ACTCA 49 at [15], per Burns and Lander JJ; R v Forrest (No 2) [2017] ACTSC 93 at [76]-[81]; and R v Crawford (No 1) [2020] ACTSC 245 at [35]. These factors ha…
R v Slattery
[2021] ACTSC 154 Para 1

…Turning to the events of burglary, the Court of Appeal said in Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [15], per Burns and Lander JJ, that ‘there is no single correct sentence for the offence of burglary or aggravated burglary’. That, of course, is not the end of the inquiry into sentencing practice, but the beg…
R v Novakovic (a.k.a. Noland) (No 1)
[2021] ACTSC 62

…[2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hawkins v Hawkins [2009] ACTSC 148; 3 ACTLR 210 Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 R v Crawford (No 1) [2020] ACTSC 245 R v Duffy [2014] ACTCA 53; 297 FLR 359 R v Forrest (No 2) [2017] ACTSC…
R v Mathews
[2020] ACTSC 364

…CTSC 30 Dawson v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 9 Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Kelly v Ashby [2015] ACTSC 346 R v BC [2019] ACTSC 233…
R v Pearson
[2020] ACTSC 375 Para 1

…Remorse is always an important factor in sentencing: see Neal v The Queen (1982) 149 CLR 305 at 314. In Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [32], I pointed out the various ways in which remorse can be shown. One of these may be by a plea of guilty, as noted by the High Court in Siganto v The Queen (1998) 194…
Tracey v The Queen
[2020] ACTCA 51

…A Crim R 41 Dawson v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 9 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De la Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; 79 NSWLR 1 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Lowndes v The Queen [1999] HCA 29; 195 CLR 665 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Millard v The Quee…
R v Kelly
[2020] ACTSC 292 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45].…
R v Williams (No 2)
[2020] ACTSC 280 Para 1

…In the ACT, sentences for burglary are often in the range of one to two years and six months’ imprisonment: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51] (Refshauge J). Information on the Sentencing Database for the period to February 2019 is consistent.…
R v Crawford (No 1)
[2020] ACTSC 245 Para 1

…As to the burglary and aggravated burglary offences, it was held by Burns and Lander JJ in Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [15] that:…
R v Hoare
[2020] ACTSC 238 Para 1

…In this jurisdiction, sentences for burglary are often in the range of one year to two years and six months' imprisonment: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51] and ACT Sentencing Database.…
R v Stacker
[2020] ACTCA 34 Para 1

…In relation to the burglary offence in Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 ( Fusimalohi ), the Court of Appeal outlined that (at [49]-[51]):…
R v Evans; R v Reid
[2020] ACTSC 169 Para 1

…fender giving sworn evidence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 ( Butters ) at [18], Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ, Alvares v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 at [44], Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 ( Mun ) at [36] and R v Mumberson […
R v TX
[2020] ACTSC 157 Para 1

…fender giving sworn evidence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 ( Butters ) at [18], Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ, Alvares v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 at [44], Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 ( Mun ) at [36] and R v Mumberson […
R v Griffiths (No 2)
[2020] ACTSC 118 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45]. Similarly, there is a “significant range of availab…
R v Watson
[2020] ACTSC 21 Para 1

…fender giving sworn evidence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 ( Butters ) at [18]; Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ; Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 at [44]; Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 ( Mun ) at [36] ; R v…
R v Collier
[2019] ACTSC 358

…Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49…
R v Teer
[2019] ACTSC 334 Para 1

…iving sworn evidence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 1 ( Butters ) at [18]; Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ; Alvares v The Queen; Farache v The Queen [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 at [44]; Mun v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 23…
R v NQ
[2019] ACTSC 275 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45].…
R v Winters
[2019] ACTSC 245

…of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen [2011] HCA 49; 244 CLR 462 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hall v The Queen; Barker v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 16 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4; 243 CLR 506 Imbornone v…
R v EP (No 3)
[2019] ACTSC 242 Para 1

…fender giving sworn evidence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 ( Butters ) at [18]; Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8]; Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 at [44]; Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 ( Mun ) at [36]; R v Mumberson [2011] NSWCCA 5…
R v BC
[2019] ACTSC 233 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45]. Similarly, there is a “significant range of availab…
R v Cowling
[2019] ACTSC 138

…Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 Fusimalohi v R [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v R [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144 Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Mill v R [1988] HCA 70; 166 CLR 59 Monfries v R [2014] ACTCA 46; 68 MVR 385 Mun v R [20…
Dawson v The Queen
[2019] ACTCA 9 Para 1

…lty for burglary is 14 years’ imprisonment and the maximum penalty for theft is 10 years’ imprisonment. As was observed in Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 ( Fusimalohi ) by Refshauge J at [51] and, more recently, by Loukas-Karlsson J in R v Lockwood [2018] ACTSC 288 at [51], although there is a “significant…
R v Smith
[2019] ACTSC 65

…Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 Cranfield v The Queen [2018] ACTCA 3 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Mill v The Queen (1988) 16…
R v Degioannis
[2019] ACTSC 47

…Crim R 9 Clarkson v The Queen [2011] VSCA 157; 32 VR 361 Cranfield v The Queen [2018] ACTCA 3 Degioannis v Boxx [2017] ACTSC 7 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Monfries v The Queen…
R v Salcedo; R v Stretton (No 3)
[2018] ACTSC 305 Para 1

…fender giving sworn evidence should be treated with considerable caution: see Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1 ( Butters ) at [18]; Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [8] per Burns and Lander JJ; Alvares v R; Farache v R [2011] NSWCCA 33; 209 A Crim R 297 at [44]; Mun v R [2015] NSWCCA 234 ( Mun ) at [36] ; R v…
R v Sikounnabouth
[2018] ACTSC 296 Para 51

…burglary, though they are “generally within the range of imprisonment for from one year to two years and six months”: Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 at [51]; Heard v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 6 at [27]-[32]; Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 at [44]-[45].…
R v Lockwood
[2018] ACTSC 288

…he Queen [2013] HCA 37; 249 CLR 571 Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67; 209 CLR 1 Filippou v The Queen [2015] HCA 29; 256 CLR 47 Fusimalohi v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 49 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen [2011] HCA 49; 244 CLR 462 Heard v The Qukeen [2015] ACTCA 6 Hili v the Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Leach v…

View all 80 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 29 of 29 shown

R v Holder
[2019] SASCFC 73

…lly and, as Gleeson CJ and Hayne J said in Dinsdale v The Queen , quoted above (at [42]), must be accompanied by reasons. See R v Holder [1983] 3 NSWLR 245 per Street CJ (at 254). 47.Counsel is, therefore, obliged not merely to assert the alleged manifest excess (or inadequacy) of the sentence but must also ad…
R v Shore
[2013] SADC 135 Para 1

…absconding. Further, he had not appeared to have engaged in any significant rehabilitation which would have otherwise entitled him to some leniency: Shore v The Queen (1992) 66 A Crim R 37.…
Wickey v McVicar
[2012] ACTCA 38 Para 1

…rglary against the sentences that have been imposed in the Supreme Court. See especially Love v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 8 at [13] and Wickey v McVicar [2012] ACTCA 38 at [25]. Also decided in this context were EG v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 17 and Richards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10. The following decisions are also…
Peter Daniels Clarke Ii v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
[2012] ACTCA 7 Para 1

…ose premises. The value of property the subject of dishonesty offences is relevant as noted by this Court in Clarke v Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] ACTCA 7 at [8].…
Love v The Queen
[2012] ACTCA 8 Para 1

…ded by assessing challenged sentences for burglary against the sentences that have been imposed in the Supreme Court. See especially Love v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 8 at [13] and Wickey v McVicar [2012] ACTCA 38 at [25]. Also decided in this context were EG v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 17 and Richards v The Queen [2012…
Richards v The Queen
[2012] ACTCA 10 Para 1

…TCA 8 at [13] and Wickey v McVicar [2012] ACTCA 38 at [25]. Also decided in this context were EG v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 17 and Richards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10. The following decisions are also relevant: R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10, Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10, R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21 and R v Relph [20…
EG v The Queen
[2012] ACTCA 17 Para 1

…See especially Love v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 8 at [13] and Wickey v McVicar [2012] ACTCA 38 at [25]. Also decided in this context were EG v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 17 and Richards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10. The following decisions are also relevant: R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10, Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10, R…
RR v R
[2011] NSWCCA 235 Para 1

…es does not mean that the sentences imposed on the appellant are manifestly excessive. As Johnson J, with whom James J agreed, said in RR v The Queen [2011] NSWCCA 235 at [152]:…
Hili v The Queen
[2010] HCA 45

…application of principle, even though where and how is not apparent from the reasons: Wong v The Queen ... 207 CLR 584 at 605 [58]; Hili v the Queen [(2010) 242 CLR 520] at 538–539 [58]–[59]. That this Court may have exercised the sentencing discretion differently is not the test: Lowndes v The Queen ... 195 CLR 665…
R v Thorn
[2010] ACTCA 10 Para 1

…ed in this context were EG v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 17 and Richards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10. The following decisions are also relevant: R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10, Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10, R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21 and R v Relph [2002] ACTCA 6.…
Hawkins v Hawkins
[2009] ACTSC 148 Para 32

…ary the task faced by an appellant seeking to show that a sentence is manifestly inadequate, or excessive. The court said (at [32]–[35]): 32.In Hawkins v Hawkins (2009) 3 ACTLR 210, Refshauge J said (at 219 [46] to [47]): 46.The determination of whether a sentence is manifestly excessive (or inadequate) is not an easy task…
The Queen v Morse
[2009] NZCA 51

…34.It is helpful also to refer to what King CJ (with whom White and Mohr JJ agreed) said in R v Morse (1979) 23 SASR 98 (at 99): To determine whether a sentence is excessive, it is necessary to view it in the perspective of the maximum sentence prescribed by law for the crime, the standards of sentencing customarily…
Benjamin McGainey and David Marsh and Jane Marsh and Denise Campbell v Vince and Angela Barac
[2008] ACTSC 48 Para 1

…appeared at the sentencing hearing for Mr Fusimalohi. This was not corrected by the parties. It should have been done. As I noted in McGainey v Barac [2008] ACTSC 48 at [4], it is desirable that the transcript that is before an appellate court be correct. There are, however, many instances of appellate courts noti…
R v Dunmall
[2008] VSCA 22 Para 1

…t. There are, however, many instances of appellate courts noting and accepting obvious errors in the transcript of the proceedings below: R v Dunmall [2008] VSCA 22 at [76]; R v Cao (2006) 65 NSWLR 552 at 563; [40]; R v Betancur-Galvis (2003) 142 A Crim R 527 at 534; [40].…
Rama v The Queen
[2006] ACTCA 25

…an be achieved, for example, where a court of criminal appeal has set out a range or tariff for a particular offence or where, as in Rama v The Queen [2006] ACTCA 25, a conspectus of comparable sentences, identifying relevant characteristics, is produced to the court. Neither party proceeded in either way in this…
R v Whyte
[2006] NSWCCA 75 Para 1

…[38] where Buddin J noted that there is a relevant distinction between “contrition” and “remorse”. It is, as Winneke P noted in R v Whyte (2004) 7 VR 397 at 403; [21] “not to be confused with such emotions as self pity.” Nor, as Asche CJ noted in R v Jabaltjari (1989) 64 NTR 1 at 10, should it be confused with a d…
Banks v The Queen
[2005] ACTCA 10 Para 1

…een [2012] ACTCA 17 and Richards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10. The following decisions are also relevant: R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10, Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10, R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21 and R v Relph [2002] ACTCA 6.…
R v Booth
[2004] ACTCA 21 Para 1

…hards v The Queen [2012] ACTCA 10. The following decisions are also relevant: R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10, Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10, R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21 and R v Relph [2002] ACTCA 6.…
R v Trad
[2003] NSWCCA 213 Para 1

…rage absconding by affording leniency in relation to it”. Indeed, as was said by Sheller JA, with whom James and O’Keefe JJ agreed, in R v Trad [2003] NSWCCA 213 at [58], an offender who absconds after pleading guilty will ordinarily receive a reduced benefit for the plea of guilty.…
R v Relph
[2002] ACTCA 6 Para 1

…10. The following decisions are also relevant: R v Thorn [2010] ACTCA 10, Banks v The Queen [2005] ACTCA 10, R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21 and R v Relph [2002] ACTCA 6.…
Wong v The Queen
[2001] HCA 64

…oncludes that there must have been some misapplication of principle, even though where and how is not apparent from the reasons: Wong v The Queen ... 207 CLR 584 at 605 [58]; Hili v the Queen [(2010) 242 CLR 520] at 538–539 [58]–[59]. That this Court may have exercised the sentencing discretion differently is…
R v Olbrich
[1999] HCA 54 Para 1

…That latter approach, however, needs to be moderated to take account of the reference by the plurality in R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 at 281; [25] to the need for evidence “if the judge [is] not prepared to act on the assertion [of a matter that the accused wishes to draw him or her attention]”. That could only be…
AB v The Queen
[1999] HCA 46 Para 1

…termine the outcome of the appeal unless the sentence to be imposed should be one other than that imposed as pointed out by Hayne J in AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111 at 160; [130]. Before determining whether appellate intervention is justified, I will consider of the second ground of the appeal.…
Siganto v the Queen
[1998] HCA 74 Para 1

…In Siganto v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 656 at 663–4; [22], Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ said that…
Mill v The Queen
[1988] HCA 70 Para 1

…ear that, for some of the period, Mr Fusimalohi was in prison in New South Wales. That does not, however, activate the principles of Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 because the offences were committed while Mr Fusimalohi was in breach of his bail by absconding. Further, he had not appeared to have engaged in any…
Neal v The Queen
[1982] HCA 55 Para 1

…In Neal v The Queen (1982) 149 CLR 305 at 315, Murphy J, citing a number of South Australian decisions, said:…
Cranssen v the King
[1936] HCA 42 Para 1

…ave imposed a different sentence; that is not the test. Such has been made clear by the High Court since at least the decision in Cranssen v The King (1936) 55 CLR 509 at 519 when Dixon, Evatt and McTiernan JJ said:…
House v R
[1936] HCA 40 Para 1

…The grounds of appeal reflect two of the grounds identified by the High Court in House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 at 505:…
House v The King
63 WN 176 Para 1

…The grounds of appeal reflect two of the grounds identified by the High Court in House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 at 505:…

Legislation cited in this decision · 5

Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT)
33 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
16A(2)(f) 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA)
10(1)(f) 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld)
9 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
5(2C) 2 mentions (from Para 1)