SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
R v Bolton [2005] QCA 335
PARTIES:
R
v
BOLTON, Luke Alan
(applicant)FILE NO/S:
CA No 119 of 2005
DC No 7 of 2005DIVISION:
Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:
Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court at Gympie
DELIVERED ON:
9 September 2005
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
30 August 2005
JUDGES:
McMurdo P, Keane JA and Fryberg J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order madeORDER:
Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed
CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE - APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS - APPLICATIONS TO REDUCE SENTENCE - WHEN REFUSED - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - SEXUAL OFFENCES - where applicant pleaded guilty to one count of rape and one count of doing grievous bodily harm - where applicant had used a knife in order to allow him to violently rape a young woman - where the complainant had grabbed the knife in the course of struggling with the applicant and done serious damage to three of her fingers - where the applicant held the knife to the complainant's neck during the course of the rape - where the applicant was a young man with no previous criminal history - where the applicant had given differing accounts of the incident that revealed a lack of insight into the offence he had committed - where the learned sentencing judge found that the applicant was not genuinely remorseful for his behaviour - where the applicant was sentenced to ten years imprisonment with an automatic serious violent offence declaration under Pt 9A Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) - whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
R v Basic [2000] QCA 155; (2000) 115 A Crim R 456, distinguished
R v Mallie [2000] QCA 188, CA No 49 of 2000, 17 May 2000, considered
COUNSEL:
T D Martin SC for the applicant
M J Copley for the respondentSOLICITORS:
Ryan & Bosscher for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent
McMURDO P: I agree with Keane JA's reasons for refusing this application for leave to appeal against sentence.
The applicant used a knife to threaten the complainant into submission. This resulted in cuts to her hand amounting to grievous bodily harm. The information the complainant supplied to the prosecutor at sentence was that she then had a continuing mild disability, limiting movement in her hand. In addition to the use of knife, the offence of rape involved considerable physical violence including stuffing a cloth into the complainant's mouth and unprotected penile penetration of her vagina. The experience was undoubtedly a terrifying one for the complainant. The psychiatric assessment and the pre-sentence report tendered at sentence do not suggest especially promising prospects of rehabilitation for the applicant, although they note that he may well benefit from psychiatric assessment and future psychological counselling.
Continue reading R v Bolton
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Bolton [2005] QCA 335
- Case
- [2005] QCA 335
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The applicant argued that the sentence was disproportionate to the gravity of the offence, given his lack of previous criminal history and his otherwise good character. The court considered the principles of sentencing and the need to balance the seriousness of the offence against the personal circumstances of the offender. The court also noted that the sentencing judge had taken into account the gravity of the offences, the applicant’s lack of insight, and his lack of remorse.
The court held that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive. The court noted that the offences were of a very serious nature, involving the use of a knife and causing serious injury to the complainant. The court also noted that the sentencing judge had considered the applicant’s lack of previous criminal history and good character, but had found that these factors were outweighed by the gravity of the offences. The court found that the sentence imposed was appropriate and reflected the seriousness of the offences.
The final orders of the court were that the application for leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed. The sentence of ten years imprisonment, with an automatic declaration under Part 9A of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), was upheld.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed
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.