R v Black; R v Sutton
Case
•
[2004] QCA 369
•8 October 2004
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
R v Black; R v Sutton [2004] QCA 369
[2004] QCA 369
8 October 2004
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicants, Stephen Glen Black and Suzanne Margaret Sutton, appealed against their respective sentences and convictions. Black appealed against a five-year suspended sentence for fraud and other related charges, while Sutton appealed against a two-year suspended sentence for fraud and making a false statement. Sutton also sought an amendment to the indictment to include the element of knowledge for the false statement charge. The court had to determine whether the amendment to the indictment was permissible and if it would cause an injustice to the applicant. The court also had to assess whether the sentences were manifestly excessive.
The court found that the amendment to the indictment was not permissible as there was no evidence to infer that Sutton had the requisite knowledge. The court also found that the amendment would cause an injustice to Sutton as it would change the nature of the offence charged. Consequently, the court set aside Sutton's plea of guilty and conviction on the count of making a false statement. The court also found that Black's sentence was not manifestly excessive as it was necessary to maintain public confidence in the building authority's ability to regulate operators in the building industry in accordance with its statutory obligations.
The court allowed Black's appeal against the sentence on count 2 and set it aside, ordering instead a sentence of three years imprisonment, suspended after 12 months for an operational period of four years. The court also granted leave to Sutton to appeal against her sentence and set aside the sentence on count 1, ordering instead a sentence of two years imprisonment, suspended forthwith for an operational period of two years. The court also set aside Sutton's plea of guilty and conviction on count 19. The court issued a warrant for Black's arrest to lie in the Registry for seven days from the date of the order.
The court's final orders were to grant leave to both applicants to appeal against their respective sentences and convictions. The court allowed Black's appeal to the extent of setting aside the sentence on count 2 and ordering a new sentence. The court also allowed Sutton's appeal, set aside her plea of guilty and conviction on count 19 and on count 1, and ordered a new sentence. The court issued a warrant for Black's arrest.
The court found that the amendment to the indictment was not permissible as there was no evidence to infer that Sutton had the requisite knowledge. The court also found that the amendment would cause an injustice to Sutton as it would change the nature of the offence charged. Consequently, the court set aside Sutton's plea of guilty and conviction on the count of making a false statement. The court also found that Black's sentence was not manifestly excessive as it was necessary to maintain public confidence in the building authority's ability to regulate operators in the building industry in accordance with its statutory obligations.
The court allowed Black's appeal against the sentence on count 2 and set it aside, ordering instead a sentence of three years imprisonment, suspended after 12 months for an operational period of four years. The court also granted leave to Sutton to appeal against her sentence and set aside the sentence on count 1, ordering instead a sentence of two years imprisonment, suspended forthwith for an operational period of two years. The court also set aside Sutton's plea of guilty and conviction on count 19. The court issued a warrant for Black's arrest to lie in the Registry for seven days from the date of the order.
The court's final orders were to grant leave to both applicants to appeal against their respective sentences and convictions. The court allowed Black's appeal to the extent of setting aside the sentence on count 2 and ordering a new sentence. The court also allowed Sutton's appeal, set aside her plea of guilty and conviction on count 19 and on count 1, and ordered a new sentence. The court issued a warrant for Black's arrest.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Appeal
-
Sentencing
-
Factors to be Taken into Account
-
Manifestly Excessive Sentence
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
R v Black; R v Sutton [2004] QCA 369
Most Recent Citation
Commissioner of Police v James [2013] QDC 54
Cases Citing This Decision
8
Commissioner of Police v James
[2013] QDC 54
Huynh v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
[2010] QDC 443
R v KU; ex parte Attorney-General (No 2)
[2008] QCA 154
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
1
R v Aston-Brien
[2004] QCA 23
GAS v The Queen
[2004] HCA 22
R v Sadeed
[2004] QCA 32
Cited Sections