Legal Research
Cases
R v Bryant

R v Bryant

Case [2007] QCA 247 3 August 2007

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247

PARTIES:

R
v
BRYANT, Darryl Robert
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 77 of 2007
DC No 647 of 2006
DC No 158 of 2007

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Southport

DELIVERED ON:

3 August 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

18 July 2007

JUDGES:

de Jersey CJ, Jerrard JA and Mullins J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

1. Allow the application
2. Allow the appeal
3. Substitute a sentence of four years imprisonment, with a parole eligibility date of 27 September 2008

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 ALLOWED – GENERALLY – where the applicant pleaded guilty to all counts on two indictments, charging the commission of nine different offences against property – where the applicant was 35 years old – where the applicant had an extensive criminal history for like offences – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive

R v Cummins[2004] QCA 350; CA No 294 of 2006, 23 September 2004, distinguished
R v Easton[2002] QCA 110; CA No 12 of 2002, 21 March 2002, considered
R v Faramus[1999] QCA 167; CA No 30 of 1999, 11 May 1999, considered
R v Karbanowisz[2003] QCA 543; CA No 295 of 2003, 4 December 2003, considered
R v Lennon[2005] QCA 10; CA No 393 of 2004, 7 February 2005, considered
R v McDowall[2005] QCA 260; CA No 126 of 2005, 26 July 2005, distinguished
R v Muscat[2005] QCA 129; CA No 233 of 2005, 29 April 2005, considered
R v Ross[2000] QCA 49; CA 406 of 1999, 29 February 2000, distinguished
R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G; CA No 510 of 1994, considered
R v Smith[2000] QCA 127, CA 405 of 1999, 11 April 2000, distinguished
R v Taylor[2007] QCA 214; CA No 88 of 2007, 12 July 2007, considered
R v Western[2005] QCA 176; CA No 87 of 2005, 30 May 2005, considered
R v Williams[2004] QCA 27; CA No 2 of 2004, 16 February 2004, distinguished

COUNSEL:

A W Moynihan SC for the applicant
R G Martin SC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the respondent

de JERSEY CJ: I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment of Jerrard JA. I agree with the orders proposed by His Honour and with his reasons.

JERRARD JA: On 27 March 2007 Darryl Bryant pleaded guilty to all counts on two indictments, charging the commission of nine different offences against property. The learned sentencing judge observed that the 35 year old Mr Bryant had an…

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 Bryant

Details

AGLC: R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247
Case: [2007] QCA 247
Decision Date: 3 August 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal before the court involved the applicant, Bryant, who had pleaded guilty to nine offences against property, spread across two indictments. Bryant, aged 35 at the time of sentencing, had a significant history of similar criminal activities. The primary issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed on Bryant was manifestly excessive. The court was tasked with reviewing the circumstances surrounding the sentence and determining if it warranted a reduction.

The court considered the nature and number of offences, the applicant's age, and his extensive criminal history. It was essential to balance the need for punishment and deterrence against the principle of proportionality in sentencing. The court examined the severity of the offences, the impact on the victims, and the likelihood of rehabilitation. Given the extensive history of similar offences and the applicant's age, the court concluded that the original sentence was indeed excessive. It found that a sentence of four years imprisonment with parole eligibility from 27 September 2008 was more appropriate.

Based on the findings, the court allowed the application to reduce the sentence and granted the appeal. The original sentence was substituted with a four-year imprisonment term, with parole eligibility set for 27 September 2008. This decision reflects the court's consideration of the applicant's criminal history, the nature of the offences, and the need for a proportionate sentence.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Allow the application

2. Allow the appeal

3. Substitute a sentence of four years imprisonment, with a parole eligibility date of 27 September 2008

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247

Most Recent Citation

R v Cameron [2007] QCA 250

Cases citing this decision · 18 of 18 shown

R v Brown
[2023] QCA 238 Para 41

…llowed, the head sentence was set aside and a sentence of four years imprisonment with a parole eligibility date after 18 months was substituted. [23][2007] QCA 247.…
Turnbull v Commissioner of Police
[2016] QDC 36

…[15][2007] QCA 247.…
R v MDA
[2015] QDC 345 Para 1

…ropriate way to deal with you is this – and be patient with me because there’s a lot of offences. I will just go through them one by one. [1] [2007] QCA 247. [2] [2002] QCA 481. [3] [1997] QCA 260 [4] [2005] QCA 392.…
R v Bliss
[2015] QCA 53 Para 1

…r in the sentencing judge’s discretion, nor is the sentence imposed such that without identifying a specific ground some error can be inferred. [11][2007] QCA 247. [12][2011] QCA 34.…
R v Walsh
[2014] QCA 209 Para 1

…number of cases were also referred to by the Counsel for the DPP in particular R v Paton ,[7] R v Bryant ,[8] and R v Finch .[9] [7][2011] QCA 34. [8][2007] QCA 247. [9][2009] QCA 276.…
R v Mokany
[2014] QCA 51 Para 1

…allowed, the head sentence was set aside and a sentence of four years imprisonment with a parole eligibility date after 18 months was substituted. [4][2007] QCA 247.…
R v Fisher
[2013] QCA 311

…nd Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 159A Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59; [1988] HCA 70, cited R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88; [2007] QCA 247, considered R v Heath & Anor [1995] QCA 170, considered R v Howie [2009] QCA 50, considered R v Watson [2009] QCA 243, considered COUNSEL: The applicant appeared on his ow…
R v Hazelgrove
[2013] QCA 243

…hich a lesser sentence was imposed – whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88; [2007] QCA 247, considered R v Carter [2008] QCA 226, cited R v Donald [2000] QCA 399, cited R v Harris (2007) 171 A Crim R 267; [2007] NSWCCA 130, cited R v Vaughan [2005] QCA 348, cons…
R v Steedman
[2011] QCA 246

…icant's sentence accords with the need for parity of sentencing between co-offenders R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88; [2007] QCA 247, considered COUNSEL: The applicant appeared on his own behalf M B Lehane for the respondent SOLICITORS: The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Q…
R v Finch
[2009] QCA 276 Para 1

…offenders being prepared to plead to offences and, in many cases, that will only occur if it is worthwhile for an offender to do so. [13] R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247 per Jerrard JA at [11].…
R v Watson
[2009] QCA 243 Para 1

…The prosecutor relied on R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247 ( Bryant ) and submitted that the sentence on each of counts 6 to 19 should be a period of four years’ imprisonment cumulative upon the sentences that the applicant was currently serving, with an eligibility for parole dated fixed at 1 August 2011 which was 18 mo…
R v Melville
[2009] QCA 108

…Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 159A Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59; [1988] HCA 70, cited R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88; [2007] QCA 247, cited R v Kissier [2005] QCA 375, cited R v Weeding [2007] QCA 311, cited COUNSEL: T Ryan for the applicant/appellant P F Rutledge for the respondent SOLICITORS: Legal Aid…
R v Howie
[2009] QCA 50 Para 1

…The respondent's counsel referred the Court to R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88 at 91; [2007] QCA 247 at [11]. Jerrard JA there observed that the cases generally support sentences "in the order of four to four and a half years imprisonment, with a significant degree of suspension before the mid-point of that sen…
R v Smith
[2008] QCA 62

…tensions – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40, cited R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247, considered R v Tait [1999] 2 Qd R 667; [1998] QCA 304, cited COUNSEL: The applicant appeared on his own behalf D A Holliday for the respondent SOLICITORS: The applicant appeared on…
R v. Heginbotham, McCartney & Room
[2008] QCA 47 Para 1

…In R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247, the sentencing judge at first instance had sentenced the offender to five years imprisonment and fixed a parole eligibility date of two years. The court allowed his appeal. After an extensive review of the comparable cases, the Court substituted a sentence of four years imprisonment,…
R v. Dawson
[2007] QCA 343

…nce – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive R v Faramus [1999] QCA 167; CA No 30 of 1999, 11 May 1999, distinguished R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247; CA No 77 of 2007, 3 August 2007, applied R v Anderson [1995] QCA 100; CA No 11 of 1995, 14 March 1995, distinguished COUNSEL: T Moynihan S C for the applicant M J…
R v. Cameron
[2007] QCA 250 Para 1

…loss of approximately $9,119. He had volunteered the commission of most offences, and had a limited prior history. On the other hand, in R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247, this Court, while allowing an application, imposed a head sentence of four years imprisonment, with a parole eligibility date after 18 months, on a 35…
MIL v Commissioner of Police
[2021] QDC 330

…(Qld) Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) CASES: Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247 R v Cummins [2004] QCA 350 R v McDowall [2005] QCA 260 R v Smith [2000] QCA 127 R v Williams [2004] QCA 27 SOLICITORS: E Kurz (Legal Aid Queensland) for the appellan…

View all 18 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 16 of 16 shown

R v Taylor
[2007] QCA 214 Para 1

…The sentence Mr Moynihan SC finally sought was higher than that imposed recently by this Court in R v MJ Taylor [2007] QCA 214 where that 20 year old offender – 22 when sentenced – succeeded on appeal in having his sentence reduced to two years imprisonment, with a suspension after eight months coinciding with a…
R v McDowall
[2005] QCA 260 Para 1

…Mr Moynihan’s submissions had referred to the following cases: R v McDowall [2005] QCA 260, R v Williams [2004] QCA 27, R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G CA No 510 of 1994, R v Cummins [2004] QCA 350, R v Ross [2000] QCA 49, and R v Smith [2000] QCA 127. Mr Moynihan SC had also submitted that a mature offender with a s…
R v Weston
[2005] QCA 176 Para 1

…d to the decisions in R v Easton [2002] QCA 110, R v Karbanowisz [2003] QCA 543, R v Lennon [2005] QCA 10, R v Muscat [2005] QCA 129, and R v Western [2005] QCA 176, for the submission that the range of available penalty increases to three to five years imprisonment in cases where there is in excess of 20 offence…
R v Muscat
[2005] QCA 129 Para 1

…offences. Mr Moynihan SC referred to the decisions in R v Easton [2002] QCA 110, R v Karbanowisz [2003] QCA 543, R v Lennon [2005] QCA 10, R v Muscat [2005] QCA 129, and R v Western [2005] QCA 176, for the submission that the range of available penalty increases to three to five years imprisonment in cases where…
R v Lennon
[2005] QCA 10 Para 1

…for a series of property offences. Mr Moynihan SC referred to the decisions in R v Easton [2002] QCA 110, R v Karbanowisz [2003] QCA 543, R v Lennon [2005] QCA 10, R v Muscat [2005] QCA 129, and R v Western [2005] QCA 176, for the submission that the range of available penalty increases to three to five years i…
R v Cummins
[2004] QCA 350 Para 1

…eferred to the following cases: R v McDowall [2005] QCA 260, R v Williams [2004] QCA 27, R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G CA No 510 of 1994, R v Cummins [2004] QCA 350, R v Ross [2000] QCA 49, and R v Smith [2000] QCA 127. Mr Moynihan SC had also submitted that a mature offender with a significant criminal history wou…
R v Williams
[2004] QCA 27 Para 1

…Mr Moynihan’s submissions had referred to the following cases: R v McDowall [2005] QCA 260, R v Williams [2004] QCA 27, R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G CA No 510 of 1994, R v Cummins [2004] QCA 350, R v Ross [2000] QCA 49, and R v Smith [2000] QCA 127. Mr Moynihan SC had also submitted that a mature offender with a…
R v Karbanowicz
[2003] QCA 543 Para 1

…ve more than two years jail for a series of property offences. Mr Moynihan SC referred to the decisions in R v Easton [2002] QCA 110, R v Karbanowisz [2003] QCA 543, R v Lennon [2005] QCA 10, R v Muscat [2005] QCA 129, and R v Western [2005] QCA 176, for the submission that the range of available penalty increase…
R v Meredith
[2002] QCA 481 Para 1

…beyond the head sentence imposed where a recidivist offender took property valued in all at less than $7,000. Decisions such as that in R v Meredith [2002] QCA 481 suggest a range of five to six years as a head sentence are appropriate where far more is stolen. Meredith stole $99,000, and committed 39 counts. Hi…
R v Easton
[2002] QCA 110 Para 1

…criminal histories do not receive more than two years jail for a series of property offences. Mr Moynihan SC referred to the decisions in R v Easton [2002] QCA 110, R v Karbanowisz [2003] QCA 543, R v Lennon [2005] QCA 10, R v Muscat [2005] QCA 129, and R v Western [2005] QCA 176, for the submission that the ran…
R v Smith
[2000] QCA 127 Para 1

…A 260, R v Williams [2004] QCA 27, R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G CA No 510 of 1994, R v Cummins [2004] QCA 350, R v Ross [2000] QCA 49, and R v Smith [2000] QCA 127. Mr Moynihan SC had also submitted that a mature offender with a significant criminal history would not attract a head sentence exceeding two years imp…
R v Ross
[2000] QCA 49 Para 1

…cases: R v McDowall [2005] QCA 260, R v Williams [2004] QCA 27, R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G CA No 510 of 1994, R v Cummins [2004] QCA 350, R v Ross [2000] QCA 49, and R v Smith [2000] QCA 127. Mr Moynihan SC had also submitted that a mature offender with a significant criminal history would not attract a head se…
R v Faramus
[1999] QCA 167 Para 1

…Mr R Martin SC for the respondent referred the Court to the decision in R v Faramus [1999] QCA 167, where this Court upheld a sentence of six years imposed on an applicant in respect of 16 offences committed against property, causing a loss to complainants in the order of $24,000. That applicant was in his late 3…
R v Davidson
[1997] QCA 279 Para 1

…ome $29,000 to other people. His sentence of four years imprisonment with parole recommended after 18 months was upheld. Likewise in R v Davidson [1997] QCA 279, that 30 year old offender who pleaded guilty to 22 offences against property causing a loss of $30,000 to other people, and who had some prior convictio…
R v Shearer
[1996] QCA 213 Para 1

…hat head sentence by one year to allow for the pleas of guilty and other matters. The judgment in that matter refers to a decision in R v Shearer [1996] QCA 213, where that applicant, who had some previous convictions, admitted by his pleas to 52 counts of offences against property. He was aged 28, and had caused…
[2003] QCA 044
[2003] QCA 044 Para 1

…this Court in the five to six year range include the sentence upheld by this Court in the matter of R v Josey ex parte Attorney-General of Queensland [2003] QCA 044 in which that offender, who was 17 and 18 when he offended and 21 when sentenced, had been dealt with for 153 offences against property which had cau…

Legislation cited in this decision · 1

Drug Rehabilitation (Court Diversion) Act 2000 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 1)

CITATION:	R v Bryant [2007] QCA 247
PARTIES:	R v BRYANT, Darryl Robert (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 77 of 2007 DC No 647 of 2006 DC No 158 of 2007
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Southport
DELIVERED ON:	3 August 2007
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	18 July 2007
JUDGES:	de Jersey CJ, Jerrard JA and Mullins J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	1. Allow the application 2. Allow the appeal 3. Substitute a sentence of four years imprisonment, with a parole eligibility date of 27 September 2008
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 ALLOWED – GENERALLY – where the applicant pleaded guilty to all counts on two indictments, charging the commission of nine different offences against property – where the applicant was 35 years old – where the applicant had an extensive criminal history for like offences – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive R v Cummins[2004] QCA 350; CA No 294 of 2006, 23 September 2004, distinguished R v Easton[2002] QCA 110; CA No 12 of 2002, 21 March 2002, considered R v Faramus[1999] QCA 167; CA No 30 of 1999, 11 May 1999, considered R v Karbanowisz[2003] QCA 543; CA No 295 of 2003, 4 December 2003, considered R v Lennon[2005] QCA 10; CA No 393 of 2004, 7 February 2005, considered R v McDowall[2005] QCA 260; CA No 126 of 2005, 26 July 2005, distinguished R v Muscat[2005] QCA 129; CA No 233 of 2005, 29 April 2005, considered R v Ross[2000] QCA 49; CA 406 of 1999, 29 February 2000, distinguished R v Speechley, ex-parte A-G; CA No 510 of 1994, considered R v Smith[2000] QCA 127, CA 405 of 1999, 11 April 2000, distinguished R v Taylor[2007] QCA 214; CA No 88 of 2007, 12 July 2007, considered R v Western[2005] QCA 176; CA No 87 of 2005, 30 May 2005, considered R v Williams[2004] QCA 27; CA No 2 of 2004, 16 February 2004, distinguished
COUNSEL:	A W Moynihan SC for the applicant R G Martin SC for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the respondent