FV v The Queen

The matter before the court was an appeal by the defendant against his conviction and sentence for aggravated sexual intercourse and attempted aggravated sexual intercourse. The appellant, the father of the complainant, was convicted of the offences after an agreed statement of facts was entered into, whereby it was agreed that the appellant had sexually assaulted his daughter. The trial judge had sentenced the appellant to imprisonment for a total of eight years, with a non-parole period of five years and three months. The appellant argued that the sentence was excessive and that the trial judge had erred in going outside the agreed statement of facts in sentencing.

The court considered whether the trial judge was able to go outside the agreed statement of facts in sentencing and whether the sentence was excessive. The court held that the trial judge was not restricted to the agreed statement of facts in sentencing and was entitled to consider all relevant material, including the complainant's statement and other material tendered. The court further held that the sentence was not excessive, taking into account the gravity of the offences and the need for general and specific deterrence.

The court noted that the offences were of a serious nature and involved a breach of the trust between a parent and child. The court considered the impact of the offences on the complainant and her family and the need to protect the community. The court also noted that the appellant had no previous convictions and had shown some remorse. The court concluded that the sentence was appropriate and reflected the seriousness of the offences.

The appeal was dismissed and the conviction and sentence were upheld.