Parker v The Queen - [2021] NSWCCA 102

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Parker v R [2021] NSWCCA 102
Hearing dates: 17 May 2021
Date of orders: 21 May 2021
Decision date: 21 May 2021
Before: Garling J at [1];
Beech-Jones J at [2];
N Adams at [3].
Decision:
(1) Extension of time is granted.
(2) Leave to appeal is refused.

Catchwords:
CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence – manifest excess – “compassionate grounds” related to the health of the applicant’s father – where applicant convicted of domestic violence offences and perverting the course of justice – purposes of sentencing – need for denunciation and general deterrence – leave to appeal refused

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61, 111(2), 319
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 166

Cases Cited:
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Yaman v R [2020] NSWCCA 239

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Luke Parker (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Self-represented (Applicant)
S Traynor (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2018/336524
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

10 March 2020

Before:

Herbert DCJ

File Number(s):

2018/336524

Judgment

GARLING J: I agree with the orders proposed by N Adams J and with her Honour’s reasons, particularly that no error has been identified by the applicant. I wish to add that the remarks on sentence of the Herbert DCJ were careful, thorough and comprehensive. In those circumstances, it is appropriate that this Court confines its judgment, as N Adams J has done, to the matters essential to the determination of the application for leave to appeal.
BEECH-JONES J: I agree with N Adams J.
N ADAMS J: The applicant, Mr Luke Parker, seeks leave under s 5(1)(c) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) to appeal against the sentence imposed on him by Herbert DCJ on 10 March 2020. The applicant requires an extension of time. The Crown does not oppose that application.
On 22 October 2019, the applicant pleaded guilty to the following charges:

Count 1: Enter dwelling house with intent to commit a serious indictable offence in circumstances of aggravation contrary to s 111(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (maximum penalty: 14 years imprisonment);
Count 2: Common assault contrary to s 61 of the Crimes Act (maximum penalty: 2 years imprisonment);
Count 3: Do act with intent to pervert the course of justice contrary to s 319 of the Crimes Act (maximum penalty: 14 years imprisonment).

The applicant was also sentenced pursuant to a certificate under s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) for a related offence of contravene apprehended domestic violence order (“ADVO”) contrary to s 14(1) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW) (maximum penalty: 2 years imprisonment and/or 50 penalty units).
The applicant received a discount of 10% for his pleas of guilty…

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 Parker v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Parker v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA 102
Case: [2021] NSWCCA 102
Decision Date: 21 May 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Parker v The Queen, the applicant appealed against his sentence, seeking a reduction on the grounds of his father's deteriorating health. The case originated from a conviction for domestic violence offences and perverting the course of justice. The High Court of Australia was tasked with assessing whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and warranted a reduction on compassionate grounds. The applicant's primary argument was that the health of his father, who was critically ill and required the applicant's assistance, constituted a compelling reason for mitigating his sentence.

The court was required to balance the purposes of sentencing, including denunciation and general deterrence, against the applicant's personal circumstances. The legal issues focused on whether the applicant's father's health could be considered a sufficient ground for a sentence reduction, and if so, how this would affect the overarching objectives of the criminal justice system. The court examined the severity of the applicant's crimes, the necessity of his involvement in his father's care, and the impact of a reduced sentence on public confidence in the criminal justice system.

The High Court ultimately found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The court emphasised the importance of maintaining the balance between individual compassion and the broader objectives of sentencing, including deterrence. The court acknowledged the applicant's personal circumstances but concluded that the severity of his crimes necessitated a firm sentence to uphold the principles of justice and deterrence. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal was refused.

Orders