SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
R v Brown [2004] QCA 4
PARTIES:
R
v
BROWN, Allyson Leanne
(applicant)FILE NO/S:
CA No 369 of 2003
SC No 20 of 2003DIVISION:
Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:
Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court at Cairns
DELIVERED ON:
4 February 2004
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
4 February 2004
JUDGES:
de Jersey CJ, Williams JA, Mackenzie J
Judgment of the CourtORDER:
Application dismissed
CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL LAW - JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDER – where appellant killed deceased by stabbing – where appellant affected by alcohol – where appellant had extensive prior criminal history
R v Baker [2002] QCA 174; CA No 329 of 2001, 17 May 2002, referred to
R v Benstead [1995] QCA 195; CA No 9 of 1995, 25 May 1995, referred to
R v Stafford [1996] QCA 79; CA No 503 of 1995, 13 March 1996, referred toCOUNSEL:
A J Rafter SC for the applicant
S G Bain for the respondentSOLICITORS:
Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The applicant was convicted by a jury of the manslaughter of a 42 year old man and sentenced to six years' imprisonment.
She was just short of adulthood in law at the time of the offence being 16 years and 11 months of age and she was 18 years and eight months old when sentenced. She was sentenced, of course, as an adult though against an applicable 10 years' imprisonment maximum by operation of the Juvenile Justice Act. It is not suggested the learned sentencing Judge erred in his application of the provisions of that Act, simply that the six years was a manifestly excessive term particularly having regard to the applicant's deprived background.
She killed the deceased by stabbing him in the neck. She had with deliberation previously obtained the knife she used for that purpose. She and the deceased were intoxicated. They had been drinking at a hotel and then went to his house. She claimed to be reacting to unwanted sexual advances but the reality is the deceased probably posed no real threat to her, in saying that not to diminish the plain unacceptability of his conduct in that regard.
The applicant has had a most unfortunate personal background, one of deprivation and abuse. But the particular difficulty she faced upon sentence was her extensive prior criminal history and especially prior convictions for crimes of violence. On 21 February 2001 she was convicted of assault occasioning bodily harm involving a stabbing and sentenced to nine months detention with an order for immediate release. Within one month of her being released she committed a serious assault by pulling a knife on a police officer.
She was required to serve the nine months detention imposed on 21 February 2001 leading to her release in August 2001. The instant offence occurred on 21 December 2001. Against that history and allowing for her youth, six years' imprisonment was unsurprising even against a 10 year maximum. She had offered to plead guilty to manslaughter but as the learned Judge pointed out conducted her murder trial on the basis the death was accidental. We were referred to Benstead, COA9/1995; Baker (2002) Queensland Court of Appeal 174; and Stafford, Court of Appeal 503 of 1995.
Particularly allowing for the applicant's apparent propensity for this sort of crime I do not consider the sentence of six years' imprisonment which was imposed is rendered doubtful by any of those cases. I would refuse the application.
WILLIAMS JA: I agree.
MACKENZIE J: I agree.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The application is dismissed.
- AGLC
- R v Brown [2004] QCA 4
- Case
- [2004] QCA 4
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was to determine the appropriate sentence for the appellant, taking into account the mitigating and aggravating factors presented. The court had to balance the seriousness of the crime with the appellant's personal circumstances, such as his alcohol dependency and prior criminal conduct. The court also had to consider whether these factors warranted a lesser sentence or if they should instead result in a more severe punishment.
In delivering the judgment, the court meticulously evaluated the evidence presented regarding the appellant's intoxication and his extensive criminal background. The court acknowledged the mitigating effect of the appellant's alcohol dependency but ultimately found that the gravity of the crime and his prior criminal conduct warranted a substantial sentence. The court concluded that the sentence imposed was just and appropriate, taking into account all relevant factors. The court dismissed the application for a lesser sentence.
The final order of the court was to dismiss the application, affirming the sentence imposed on the appellant for the stabbing that resulted in the death of the deceased. The court's decision highlighted the need to consider both the personal circumstances of the offender and the gravity of the crime when determining an appropriate sentence.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application 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.