MCKEAGG -v- THE QUEEN [2001] WASCA 99
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2001] WASCA 99 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:141/2000 | 15 FEBRUARY 2001 | |
| Coram: | MALCOLM CJ KENNEDY J STEYTLER J | 28/03/01 | |
| 15 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Application for leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed and total sentence reduced to 10 years and six months | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | WILLIAM MURRAY MCKEAGG THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Appellant convicted on two counts of robbery, one count of robbery while pretending to be armed, one count of robbery in company while pretending to be armed and one count of attempted robbery while pretending to be armed Total sentence of 14 years reduced to 12 years on account of plea of guilty Discount inadequate Total sentence reduced by 25 per cent from 14 years to 10 years and six months |
Legislation: | Criminal Code s 391, s 393 |
Case References: | Cork v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970664; 2 December 1997 Eldridge v The Queen [2000] WASCA 41 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 Miles v The Queen (1997) 17 WAR 518 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610 Robertson v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990130; 19 March 1999 Taylor v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980152; 6 April 1998 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Walsh v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960471; 26 August 1996 Wheeler v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 920398; 22 July 1992 Norman v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 9489; 1 February 1989 Smedley v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 8077; 20 February 1990 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : MCKEAGG -v- THE QUEEN [2001] WASCA 99 CORAM : MALCOLM CJ
- KENNEDY J
STEYTLER J
- Appellant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Appellant convicted on two counts of robbery, one count of robbery while pretending to be armed, one count of robbery in company while pretending to be armed and one count of attempted robbery while pretending to be armed - Total sentence of 14 years reduced to 12 years on account of plea of guilty - Discount inadequate - Total sentence reduced by 25 per cent from 14 years to 10 years and six months
Legislation:
Criminal Code s 391, s 393
(Page 2)
Result:
Application for leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed and total sentence reduced to 10 years and six months
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Ms K A Vernon
Respondent : Mr S E Stone
Solicitors:
Appellant : Unrepresented Criminal Appellants Scheme
Respondent : State…
Continue reading McKeagg v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- McKeagg v The Queen [2001] WASCA 99
- Case
- [2001] WASCA 99
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appellant, McKeagg, was convicted by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales on five counts relating to robberies, including robbery while pretending to be armed and robbery in company while pretending to be armed. The appellant applied to the High Court of Australia for leave to appeal against the sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal, which reduced his total sentence from 14 years to 12 years due to his plea of guilty. The central issue before the court was whether the reduction in sentence was adequate, particularly in light of the plea of guilty, and whether the Court of Appeal had correctly exercised its discretion in sentencing.
The court found that the discount given by the Court of Appeal was inadequate. The High Court held that a 25% reduction from the original sentence of 14 years was appropriate, resulting in a total sentence of 10 years and six months. The court noted that the discount for a guilty plea should be substantial but did not need to be as high as 50%. It also emphasised the importance of consistency in sentencing, particularly in cases involving multiple offences and aggravating factors such as the use of a weapon. The High Court concluded that the Court of Appeal had not adequately justified the reduction in sentence, and thus the discount was insufficient.
The application for leave to appeal was granted, and the appeal was allowed. The total sentence was reduced from 12 years to 10 years and six months, reflecting a more appropriate discount for the appellant's guilty plea and the nature of the offences. This decision underscores the necessity for courts to carefully consider the circumstances of each case when determining the appropriate sentence, particularly in cases involving multiple offences and significant aggravating factors.
The court found that the discount given by the Court of Appeal was inadequate. The High Court held that a 25% reduction from the original sentence of 14 years was appropriate, resulting in a total sentence of 10 years and six months. The court noted that the discount for a guilty plea should be substantial but did not need to be as high as 50%. It also emphasised the importance of consistency in sentencing, particularly in cases involving multiple offences and aggravating factors such as the use of a weapon. The High Court concluded that the Court of Appeal had not adequately justified the reduction in sentence, and thus the discount was insufficient.
The application for leave to appeal was granted, and the appeal was allowed. The total sentence was reduced from 12 years to 10 years and six months, reflecting a more appropriate discount for the appellant's guilty plea and the nature of the offences. This decision underscores the necessity for courts to carefully consider the circumstances of each case when determining the appropriate sentence, particularly in cases involving multiple offences and significant aggravating factors.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed and total sentence reduced to 10 years and six months
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.