Hawker v The Queen

[2020] ACTCA 40

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL

Case Title:	Hawker v The Queen
Citation:	[2020] ACTCA 40
Hearing Date:	3 August 2020
DecisionDate:	18 August 2020
Before:	Elkaim, Loukas-Karlsson and Abraham JJ
Decision:	The appeal is dismissed.
Catchwords:	APPEAL – SENTENCE – Manifest Excess – No error established – appeal dismissed
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 24 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) s 308
Cases Cited:	Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Lowndes v The Queen [1999] HCA 29; 195 CLR 665 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Pearce v The Queen [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610 R v Carberry [2018] ACTSC 341 R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 R v Sikounnabouth [2018] ACTSC 296 R v Summerfield [2018] ACTCA 20 Schwalm v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 20 Wong v The Queen [2001] HCA 64; 207 CLR 584
Parties:	Mark John Hawker (Appellant) The Queen (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel M Hawker (Appellant) R Christensen (Respondent)
Solicitors In person (Appellant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number:	ACTCA 19 of 2020
Decision under appeal:	Court:   Before: Date of Decision: Case Title: Citation:	Supreme Court of the ACT Mossop J 9 April 2020 R v Hawker [2020] ACTSC 79

THE COURT:

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to one count of theft contrary to s 308 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to s 24 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) for which an aggregate sentence of 26 months and 15 days’ imprisonment with a nonparole period of 18 months was imposed.

1. More particularly, in respect to the assault which carried a maximum penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment, a sentence of 12 months and 15 days’ imprisonment was imposed commencing on 17 January 2020. In respect to the theft which carried a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, the appellant was sentenced to 25 months’ imprisonment commencing on 1 March 2020. A nonparole period of 18 months was imposed which commenced on 17 January 2020 and ends on 16 July 2021. The sentences had been backdated to reflect time already spent in custody. As will be apparent, the sentences were, to a significant degree, to be served concurrently. The appellant was also ordered to make reparation to the victim in the sum of $1,250 within 12 months from the date of the order.  

1. Although the appellant appeared in this Court unrepresented, he was represented during the course of the sentencing proceedings. The appellant appeals the individual sentences alleging each is manifestly excessive. The appellant wrote a letter to the Court setting out his submissions as to the errors in relation to the sentences imposed and attached three documents which contain fresh evidence. The appellant also made some oral submissions emphasising certain aspects of his argument, in particular, his rehabilitation.

1. For the reasons below, the appellant has not…