R v Bunton

[2019] QCA 214

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Bunton [2019] QCA 214

PARTIES:

R
v
BUNTON, Vetea Joseph
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 337 of 2018
DC No 40 of 2018

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane – Date of Sentence 5 December 2018 (Devereaux SC DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

Date of Orders: 2 September 2019
Date of Publication of Reasons: 15 October 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

2 September 2019

JUDGES:

Sofronoff P and Fraser and Morrison JJA

ORDERS:

Date of Orders: 2 September 2019

1.   Leave to appeal is granted.

2.   Appeal allowed.

3.   Conviction recorded on 5 December 2018 is set aside.

4.   Save as afore said, the remaining orders made by Judge Devereaux are otherwise confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – OTHER MATTERS – RECORDING OF CONVICTION – where the applicant was found to be in possession of child exploitation material – where the applicant pleaded guilty to one charge of knowingly possessing child exploitation material – where the sentence imposed included the recording of the conviction – where the applicant challenges the sentence on the ground that the recording of the conviction is manifestly excessive – where it is contended that the child exploitation material was accessed when the applicant was under eighteen years of age – where it was submitted that the applicant fitted the typology of a “situational hands-off or no contact” offender, and a low danger of reoffending in a sexual way – where it was submitted that the applicant acquired the images out of curiosity and at a time when she was struggling with issues concerning her transgender identity and sexual identity – where it is contended that there was no evidence of entrenched paedophilic tenancies – where the learned sentencing judge was of the opinion that the detrimental impacts on the applicant in having the conviction recorded did not overwhelm the serious nature of the offence – whether the recording of the conviction rendered the sentence manifestly excessive

R v Daw[2006] QCA 386, followed
R v Rogers (2013) 231 A Crim R 290; [2013] QCA 192, followed

COUNSEL:

J Briggs for the applicant
D Balic for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

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

1. SOFRONOFF P:  I agree with Morrison JA.

2. FRASER JA:  I agree with the reasons for judgment of Morrison JA.

3. MORRISON JA:  When the applicant was just over 18 years old, police executed a search warrant at her house and discovered child exploitation material on her mobile phone.  There was a total of 15 images depicting young boys between the age of five years and 16 years, posing naked, performing oral sex or engaging in anal intercourse either with other young people or adults.

4. The search occurred on 19 January 2016.  The applicant was interviewed that day and released on bail.  On 5 December 2018 the applicant…