Green, Al v The Queen

Case [2017] NSWCCA 282


Court of Criminal Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

  • Summary available
Medium Neutral Citation: Green, Al v R [2017] NSWCCA 282
Hearing dates: On the papers
Decision date: 28 November 2017
Before: Basten JA at [1];
R A Hulme J at [71];
Garling J at [72]
Decision:

(1)   Grant leave to appeal with respect to the convictions entered on pleas of guilty.

 

(2)   Dismiss the appeal against the convictions.

 (3)   Refuse leave to appeal against the aggregate sentence.
Catchwords:

CRIME – appeal – application for leave to appeal against convictions – convictions based on pleas to sexual assaults committed in 1984 – application to withdraw pleas – refusal to allow applicant to withdraw pleas –whether applicant capable of understanding nature of charges against him at time of pleading – whether applicant intended to enter pleas – whether pleas induced by inappropriate conduct of legal representatives

  CRIME – appeal – application for leave to appeal against sentence – sexual assaults committed in 1984 – whether sentence manifestly excessive – whether inappropriate reliance on pre-sentence report – sentencing principles for historical offences – need for sentences to reflect objective seriousness of offending
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 19
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61D, 61I, 90
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5
Cases Cited: McIntosh v R [2015] NSWCCA 184
Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132; [1995] HCA 41
MPB v R [2013] NSWCCA 213; 234 A Crim R 576
R v MJR (2002) 54 NSWLR 368; [2002] NSWCCA 129
Regina v SL [2004] NSWCCA 397
RL v R [2015] NSWCCA 106
Senior v R [2017] NSWCCA 220
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Al Green aka Glen Alan Rozynski (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Applicant self-represented
Ms H Roberts (Respondent)

  Solicitors:
Applicant self-represented
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2012/275374
 Decision under appeal 
Court or tribunal:
District Court
Jurisdiction:
Criminal
Date of Decision:
2 December 2016
Before:
Frearson SC DCJ
File Number(s):
2012/275374

Judgment

  1. BASTEN JA: On the night of 13 January 1984 a 17 year old woman alleged she had been sexually assaulted in a car not far from the Hume Highway at Marulan. Although she went immediately to the police, the present applicant was not arrested and charged in relation to the assaults until 3 September 2012. The identification of the applicant resulted from a DNA profile which had been obtained from him and which matched that of semen taken from the complainant’s jumper following the assaults.

  2. On 16 September 2013 the applicant entered pleas of guilty to an indictment containing five counts, namely:

(i)   detaining the complainant with intent to hold her for an advantage, namely sexual intercourse;

(ii)-(iv)   having sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent and knowing that she had not consented; and

(v)   attempting to have sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent and knowing that she had not consented.

The matter was listed for sentence on 16 January 2014.

  1. The applicant…

Details
AGLC
Green, Al v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 282
Case
[2017] NSWCCA 282
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this appeal, the applicant, Al Green, sought leave to appeal against his convictions and sentences for sexual assaults committed in 1984. Green's application included a request to withdraw his pleas of guilty and a claim that his sentences were manifestly excessive. The court was required to determine whether Green was capable of understanding the nature of the charges against him at the time he pleaded guilty, whether his pleas were induced by any inappropriate conduct of his legal representatives, and whether his sentences were appropriate in light of the principles applicable to historical offences.

The court considered whether Green was capable of understanding the charges against him at the time of his pleas and whether those pleas were made voluntarily and with an understanding of their consequences. The court found that Green was capable of understanding the charges and that his pleas were voluntary and intentional. The court also examined whether the conduct of Green's legal representatives had any undue influence on his decision to plead guilty and found that there was no inappropriate conduct influencing his pleas. Regarding the sentences, the court assessed whether they were manifestly excessive, taking into account the need for sentences to reflect the objective seriousness of the offences and the appropriate reliance on the pre-sentence report. The court concluded that the sentences were not manifestly excessive and that they appropriately reflected the gravity of the historical offences.

The court dismissed Green's application for leave to appeal against his convictions and sentences. The court found that Green was competent to enter his pleas, that his pleas were voluntary, and that the sentences were appropriate. The court did not find any basis to grant leave to appeal, and therefore, the convictions and sentences stood affirmed.

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.