Godfrey v South Australian Police No. Sccrm-03-867

In the case before the court, Godfrey appealed against the penalty imposed on him in the Magistrates Court following his guilty plea to unlawful possession. The particulars of the offence were that on 5 March 2003, Godfrey had in his possession 60 packets of insulation which were reasonably suspected of having been stolen or obtained by unlawful means. The magistrate had imposed a fine of $1000 and recorded a conviction. The appeal challenges only the recording of the conviction.

The legal issue before the court was whether the magistrate erred in deciding to record the conviction under s16 of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA). The court considered whether the magistrate had properly exercised his discretion in declining to refrain from recording a conviction. The court examined the factors the magistrate had considered, including the appellant's position of trust, the number of occasions on which the bags were kept, and the appellant's intention to return the insulation. The court also considered whether the magistrate had misdirected himself in applying the relevant law.

The court found that the magistrate had properly exercised his discretion and had not erred in deciding to record the conviction. The court accepted that the case was borderline but noted that the magistrate had given brief reasons indicating the matters he had considered. The court concluded that the appeal must be dismissed because the magistrate had not erred in his decision. The orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed and that the appellant pay the respondent's costs fixed at $150.00.