R v B - [2003] QCA 24

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v B [2003] QCA 24

PARTIES:

R
v
B
(applicant/appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 408 of 2002
DC No 261 of 2002
DC No 262 of 2002
DC No 322 of 2002

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Townsville

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

7 February 2003

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

7 February 2003

JUDGES:

Davies and Williams JJA and Cullinane J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

1.    Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted
2.    Appeal allowed
3.    Set aside sentence imposed and in lieu order the applicant undergo probation for a period of 12 months from today (Friday 7 February 2003) with the condition that the applicant undergo such counselling and other programmes as may be directed by the Director of Family Services, including a residential programme, if that is thought desirable
4.    Set aside the order recording convictions in each case

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW - JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT - SENTENCE - CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDER - where applicant a juvenile - where applicant pleaded guilty to a range of offences - where applicant had previous criminal history - whether conviction ought to have been recorded

COUNSEL:

K M McGinness for applicant/appellant
D L Meredith for respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for applicant/appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent

DAVIES JA: The applicant pleaded guilty in the District Court on 15 August 2002 to 11 offences committed between 13 December 2001 and 25 March 2002. However, as Mrs McGinness, for the applicant pointed out, the majority of the offences were committed between 30 December and 2 January.

The offences in all were, one of attempted unlawful use of a motor vehicle, two of wilful damage, one of burglary, one of assault occasioning bodily harm, two of stealing, one of attempted entry of premises, one of entry of premises and stealing, one of entry of premises with intent, one of attempted robbery whilst pretending to be armed and one of stealing from the person. She was 13 years of age when she committed these offences having been born on 24 January 1988.

On 8 November 2002 the applicant was sentenced to an effective term of six months detention immediately suspended with an order that she be immediately released from detention conditioned that she participate in a programme for a period of three months. Convictions were recorded in respect of the offences of attempted unlawful use of a motor vehicle, assault occasioning bodily harm and attempted armed robbery. She seeks leave to appeal against those sentences.

The applicant had been before the Court on four previous occasions. On 25 October 2000 it was for unlawful use of a motor vehicle. Then she was reprimanded and no conviction was recorded. On 4 June 2001 she was again before a court for unauthorised dealing with shop goods. She was then given…

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 R v B

Details

AGLC: R v B [2003] QCA 24
Case: [2003] QCA 24
Decision Date: 7 February 2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v B, the applicant, a juvenile with a previous criminal history, pleaded guilty to a range of offences before the court. The case was heard in the court of appeal where the applicant sought leave to appeal against the sentence imposed. The primary issue before the court was whether the conviction ought to have been recorded, given the applicant's age and criminal history.

The court considered the statutory provisions and relevant case law concerning the imposition of sentences for juveniles. It found that the court should have exercised its discretion to avoid recording a conviction for the applicant, given their age and the nature of the offences. The court held that the sentence imposed was not appropriate in the circumstances, particularly in light of the applicant's age and the potential for rehabilitation. The court also noted the importance of considering the welfare and rehabilitation of the juvenile offender, rather than simply focusing on punishment.

Accordingly, the court granted the application for leave to appeal, allowed the appeal, and set aside the sentence imposed. In lieu, the court ordered that the applicant undergo probation for a period of 12 months from the date of the judgment, with conditions including counselling and other programs as directed by the Director of Family Services. The court also set aside the order recording convictions in each case, reflecting the court's view that a conviction was not appropriate in this instance.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted

2. Appeal allowed

3. Set aside sentence imposed and in lieu order the applicant undergo probation for a period of 12 months from today (Friday 7 February 2003) with the condition that the applicant undergo such counselling and other programmes as may be directed by the Director of Family Services, including a residential programme, if that is thought desirable

4. Set aside the order recording convictions in each case

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.

CITATION:	R v B [2003] QCA 24
PARTIES:	R v B (applicant/appellant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 408 of 2002 DC No 261 of 2002 DC No 262 of 2002 DC No 322 of 2002
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Townsville
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	7 February 2003
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	7 February 2003
JUDGES:	Davies and Williams JJA and Cullinane J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	1. Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted 2. Appeal allowed 3. Set aside sentence imposed and in lieu order the applicant undergo probation for a period of 12 months from today (Friday 7 February 2003) with the condition that the applicant undergo such counselling and other programmes as may be directed by the Director of Family Services, including a residential programme, if that is thought desirable 4. Set aside the order recording convictions in each case
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW - JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT - SENTENCE - CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDER - where applicant a juvenile - where applicant pleaded guilty to a range of offences - where applicant had previous criminal history - whether conviction ought to have been recorded
COUNSEL:	K M McGinness for applicant/appellant D L Meredith for respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for applicant/appellant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent