KRAKOUER -v- R [1999] WASCA 147

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[1999] WASCA 147
Court:	COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Case No:	CCA:43/1999	Heard:	5 AUGUST 1999
Coram:	IPP J WHITE J HEENAN J	Delivered:	25/08/99
No of pages:	11	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal dismissed
PDF Version

Parties:	JAMES GORDON KRAKOUER THE QUEEN
Catchwords:	Criminal Law Sentence Appellant convicted following retrial Whether the fact that the appellant had undergone two trials is a mitigatory factor in relation to the sentence on second conviction Appellant convicted of one count of conspiracy to possess a quantity of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply to another and of one count of attempting to possess a quantity of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply to another Co-conspirator sentenced to a term of 12 years' imprisonment following his plea of guilty to the conspiracy charge Appellant pleading not guilty Sentences of 16 years' and 8 years' imprisonment on the respective counts not set aside as excessive Sentencing Principle of parity Whether sentences imposed upon other offenders convicted in another State of different offences under a different statute were to be taken into account in relation to the sentence upon the appellant
Legislation:	Misuse of Drugs Act, s 6, s 33(1) and s 33(2)
Case References:	Krakouer v The Queen (1996) 16 WAR 1 Siganto v The Queen (1998) 73 ALJR 162 Thorp v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970584; 5 November 1997 Chen v R (1993) 66 A Crim R 154 Duncan v R (1983) 47 ALR 746 Lowe v R (1984) 154 CLR 606 Postiglione v R (1997) 189 CLR 295 R v Calder, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960534; 11 September 1996 R v Markovina, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940671; 30 November 1994 R v Williams (1981) 5 A Crim R 81 Roeton v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990118; 16 March 1999

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : KRAKOUER -v- R [1999] WASCA 147 CORAM : IPP J

WHITE J

HEENAN J

HEARD : 5 AUGUST 1999 DELIVERED : 25 AUGUST 1999 FILE NO/S : CCA 43 of 1999 BETWEEN : JAMES GORDON KRAKOUER

Applicant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Catchwords:

Criminal Law - Sentence - Appellant convicted following retrial - Whether the fact that the appellant had undergone two trials is a mitigatory factor in relation to the sentence on second conviction - Appellant convicted of one count of conspiracy to possess a quantity of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply to another and of one count of attempting to possess a quantity of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply to another - Co-conspirator sentenced to a term of 12 years' imprisonment following his plea of guilty to the conspiracy charge - Appellant pleading not guilty - Sentences of 16 years' and 8 years' imprisonment on the respective counts…

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 Krakouer v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Krakouer v The Queen [1999] WASCA 147
Case: [1999] WASCA 147
Decision Date: 25 AUGUST 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Krakouer, appealed against the sentences imposed following his convictions at a retrial for conspiracy to possess a quantity of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply, and for attempting to possess a quantity of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia. The legal issues the court was required to decide included whether the fact that the appellant had undergone two trials was a mitigating factor in relation to the sentence on the second conviction, and whether sentences imposed upon other offenders convicted in another state of different offences under a different statute should be taken into account in relation to the sentence upon the appellant.

The court considered that the principle of parity was not applicable to the appellant's case, as the sentences imposed upon other offenders in another state were not relevant to the sentence on the appellant. The court also found that the sentences imposed on the appellant were not excessive, and that the fact that the appellant had undergone two trials was not a mitigating factor in relation to the sentence on the second conviction. The appeal was dismissed, and the sentences of 16 years' and 8 years' imprisonment on the respective counts were upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal 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.