Legal Research
Cases
Moran v Baker

Moran v Baker

Case [2019] WASC 251 8 July 2019

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL

CITATION:   MORAN -v- BAKER [2019] WASC 251
CORAM:   HALL J
HEARD:   14 JUNE 2019
DELIVERED          :   14 JUNE 2019
PUBLISHED           :   8 JULY 2019
FILE NO/S:   SJA 1057 of 2019
BETWEEN:   DANIEL ALLAN MORAN
Appellant

AND

ANDREW BAKER
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   MAGISTRATE R YOUNG
File Number            :   MI 7139 OF 2017

Catchwords:

Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Whether plea properly entered – Whether appellant intoxicated when plea entered

Criminal law – Appeal against sentence – Assault public officer – Whether 11 months’ imprisonment manifestly excessive – Whether sentencing magistrate erred in not making an order for a pre-sentence report – Whether the sentencing magistrate demonstrated bias

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 9
Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 20

Result:

Leave to appeal refused. Appeal dismissed.

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	In person
Respondent	:	Ms M M Yeung

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	In person
Respondent	:	Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Borsa v The Queen [2003] WASCA 254
Fowler v The Queen [2002] WASCA 296
Gavin v The Queen (1992) 6 WAR 195
Higgins v Worthington [2003] WASCA 19
Maxwell v The Queen [1996] HCA 46; (1996) 184 CLR 501
Meissner v The Queen [1995] HCA 41; (1995) 184 CLR 132
Minton v McAlinden [2017] WASC 99
Pilkington v The Queen [1955] Tas SR 144
Quinn v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 99
Snook v The State of Western Australia (No.2) [2015] WASCA 29
Topic v The State of Western Australia [2013] WASCA 157
Webster v The Queen [2015] WASCA 20
Wilhelm v The State of Western Australia [2013] WASCA 188
Wright v McMurchy [2012] WASCA 257

HALL J:

Summary

This appeal against both conviction and sentence was heard on 14 June 2019. At the conclusion of the hearing I gave brief reasons for refusing leave to appeal and dismissing the appeal. I said that more detailed reasons would be published in due course.
The appellant appeared in the Magistrates Court on 5, 6 and 7 February 2019 in relation to various charges including one charge of assaulting a public officer. He entered pleas of guilty to the charges and was sentenced to a total effective sentence of 2 years and 1 month imprisonment. The sentence on the charge of assaulting a public officer was 11 months' imprisonment.
The appellant sought leave to appeal against his conviction on the charge of assaulting a public officer on the basis that he alleged his plea of guilty to that charge was not properly entered. He also sought leave to appeal against the sentence of 11 months' imprisonment on that charge on the basis that it was alleged to be manifestly excessive, that the magistrate erred by not ordering a pre‑sentence report and that the magistrate was biased. The convictions and sentences imposed for the other charges dealt with at the same time…

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 Moran v Baker

Details

AGLC: Moran v Baker [2019] WASC 251
Case: [2019] WASC 251
Decision Date: 8 JULY 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Moran v Baker involved the appellant, Moran, who sought to appeal against both his conviction and sentence for assault of a public officer. The trial took place in the Magistrates' Court, and the appeal was heard by the County Court of Victoria. The appellant argued that his plea was improperly entered as he was intoxicated at the time and contended that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. Additionally, Moran claimed that the sentencing magistrate should have ordered a pre-sentence report and exhibited bias during the sentencing process.

The primary legal issues the court needed to determine were whether the appellant's plea was properly entered given his intoxicated state at the time, and if the sentence of 11 months' imprisonment was manifestly excessive. The court also considered whether the sentencing magistrate erred in not ordering a pre-sentence report and whether there was any evidence of bias in the sentencing process.

The court found that the plea was properly entered, despite the appellant's intoxication, as there was no evidence suggesting he did not understand the nature of the plea or the consequences of entering it. Regarding the sentence, the court held that while the sentence was severe, it was not manifestly excessive given the nature of the assault and the need for deterrence. The court also determined that the sentencing magistrate did not err in not ordering a pre-sentence report, as the circumstances did not warrant one. Finally, the court dismissed the claim of bias, finding no evidence to support such a contention.

The appeal was dismissed, and the original conviction and sentence were upheld. The court did not make any orders for a pre-sentence report or find any bias in the sentencing magistrate.

Orders