R -v- CAMPBELL [2002] WASCA 143
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2002] WASCA 143 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | 04/06/2002 | ||
| Case No: | CCA:172/2001 | 15 MAY 2002 | |
| Coram: | WALLWORK J MURRAY J MILLER J | 15/05/02 | |
| 12 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed Sentences of 2-1/2 years imprisonment imposed, two to be served cumulatively and the rest concurrently | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | THE QUEEN LUKE MORGAN CAMPBELL |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Sentencing Crown appeal 60 convictions of being in possession of heroin with intent to sell or supply Supporting habit 4 years' imprisonment suspended for each offence All sentences concurrent Respondent received about $22,000 over two months Total heroin about 198 grams Offending repetitive Total rehabilitation since offending Whether sentence inadequate |
Legislation: | Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 6 |
Case References: | Jarvis v The Queen (1993) 20 WAR 201 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610 Quach v The Queen, [1999] WASCA 210 R v GP (1997) 18 WAR 196 R v Leucus (1995) 78 A Crim R 40 Brittain v The Queen [2001] WASCA 117 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321 Gyurka [2001] WASCA 113 Hough [2002] WASCA 42 Law (1995) 84 A Crim R 142 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 O'Brien v Ritchie, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990123; 17 March 1999 R v Duncan (1983) 47 ALR 746 R v Liddington (1997) 18 WAR 394 Rudd v The Queen, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 970225; 15 May 1997 Smith v The Queen [2000] WASCA 243 Tsagaris v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980721; 14 December 1998 Verschauren v The Queen (1995) 17 WAR 456 Watson (1981) 3 A Crim R 254 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : R -v- CAMPBELL [2002] WASCA 143 CORAM : WALLWORK J
- MURRAY J
MILLER J
- Appellant
AND
LUKE MORGAN CAMPBELL
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Sentencing - Crown appeal - 60 convictions of being in possession of heroin with intent to sell or supply - Supporting habit - 4 years' imprisonment suspended for each offence - All sentences concurrent - Respondent received about $22,000 over two months - Total heroin about 198 grams - Offending repetitive - Total rehabilitation since offending - Whether sentence inadequate
Legislation:
Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 6
(Page 2)
Result:
Appeal allowed
Sentences of 2-1/2 years imprisonment imposed, two to be served cumulatively and the rest concurrently
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent : Mr B S Hanbury
Solicitors:
Appellant : Mr R E Cock QC
Respondent : Beau Hanbury
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Jarvis v The Queen (1993) 20 WAR 201
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610
Quach v…
Continue reading R v Campbell
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- R v Campbell [2002] WASCA 143
- Case
- [2002] WASCA 143
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of R v Campbell involved the respondent who had accumulated 60 convictions related to possession of heroin with the intent to sell or supply. The court was called upon to determine whether the sentence imposed was inadequate. The Crown had appealed the original sentence, which was a series of suspended sentences of four years for each offence, with all sentences running concurrently. In the two months prior to the sentencing, the respondent had received approximately $22,000 and was in possession of approximately 198 grams of heroin. The offending had been repetitive, and the respondent had shown significant rehabilitation since the time of the offending.
The legal issues before the court involved the adequacy of the sentence imposed by the lower court. The Crown argued that the sentence was inadequate in light of the respondent's repeated offending and the potential harm to the community. The court was required to consider the principles of sentencing and whether the sentence imposed was appropriate in the circumstances. The court also had to consider the respondent's rehabilitation and the potential deterrent effect of the sentence.
The court found that the sentence imposed by the lower court was inadequate. The court noted the repetitive nature of the offending and the potential harm to the community. The court also considered the respondent's rehabilitation but found that it did not outweigh the need for punishment and deterrence. The court found that the sentence imposed was insufficient to achieve these goals and therefore allowed the Crown's appeal. The court imposed a sentence of 2-1/2 years imprisonment, with two years to be served cumulatively and the rest concurrently.
The legal issues before the court involved the adequacy of the sentence imposed by the lower court. The Crown argued that the sentence was inadequate in light of the respondent's repeated offending and the potential harm to the community. The court was required to consider the principles of sentencing and whether the sentence imposed was appropriate in the circumstances. The court also had to consider the respondent's rehabilitation and the potential deterrent effect of the sentence.
The court found that the sentence imposed by the lower court was inadequate. The court noted the repetitive nature of the offending and the potential harm to the community. The court also considered the respondent's rehabilitation but found that it did not outweigh the need for punishment and deterrence. The court found that the sentence imposed was insufficient to achieve these goals and therefore allowed the Crown's appeal. The court imposed a sentence of 2-1/2 years imprisonment, with two years to be served cumulatively and the rest concurrently.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed
Sentences of 2-1/2 years imprisonment imposed, two to be served cumulatively
and the rest concurrently
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.