R v Conquest; Ex parte A-G (Qld) - [1995] QCA 567

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL	[1995] QCA 567
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

C.A. No. 395 of 1995

Brisbane

[Conquest ex parte AG]

T H E Q U E E N

LINCOLN PATRICK CONQUEST

Respondent

ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND

Appellant

Macrossan CJ McPherson JA Thomas J

Judgment delivered 19 December 1995
Joint reasons by McPherson JA and Thomas J; Macrossan CJ dissenting

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE GRANTED. APPEAL ALLOWED. SET ASIDE SENTENCE OF TWO YEARS IMPOSED BELOW AND IN LIEU THEREOF IMPOSE A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS, WITH DISQUALIFICATION FROM OBTAINING OR HOLDING A DRIVERS LICENCE FOR FIVE YEARS

CATCHWORDS:CRIMINAL LAW - Attorney-General appeal against sentence - dangerous driving causing death - level of sentencing - relevance of harm to victims - other factors increasing seriousness - young offender - Crown Prosecutor below conceding sentence of "about 2½ years" appropriate - whether appropriate to substitute higher sentence on Attorney-General's appeal - danger in generalisation of "normal range".

Counsel:	Mr D. Bullock for the Appellant Mr T. Glynn for the Respondent
Solicitors:	Director of Public Prosecutions for the Appellant Legal Aid Office for the Respondent

Hearing Date: 17 November 1995

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Judgment delivered 19/12/1995

This is an Attorney-General's appeal against sentence following a conviction on a charge of dangerous driving causing the death of one person and grievous bodily harm to two others. A sentence of two years imprisonment was imposed. In respect of an associated count of unlawful use of a motor vehicle the respondent was sentenced to six months imprisonment, that sentence to be concurrent. He was also disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for a period of five years.

The road accident with the serious consequences mentioned occurred in Browns Plains Road, Marsden, on 25 July 1994.

The respondent was seventeen years old at the date of the offence and eighteen when sentenced. He was alone in the car he was driving and he was aware that it was being driven without the consent of its owner. He pleaded guilty to the charge of unlawful use but on the major charge he was found guilty only after a trial. He did not give evidence at the trial but he had been interviewed by the police and his version of events was, with some exclusions thought to be appropriate, placed before the jury and it was of course available to the sentencing judge.

The respondent was, on 25 July 1994, an unlicensed driver and he was also subject to a probation order for a stealing offence which had been dealt with on 17 June 1994.

The episode of dangerous driving occurred shortly after 10pm on a fine clear night in conditions of visibility which were described as being fair. The respondent was driving in an easterly direction on Browns Plains Road and there was a group of five young people walking along the side of the same road in a westerly direction. Three of the group formed what could…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Conquest; Ex parte A-G (Qld) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1995] QCA 567
Decision Date: 19/12/1995

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This appeal was brought by the Attorney-General of Queensland against the sentence of two years imprisonment imposed on Lincoln Patrick Conquest for dangerous driving causing death and grievous bodily harm, along with a concurrent sentence of six months imprisonment for the unlawful use of a motor vehicle. The Attorney-General sought a higher sentence on appeal, arguing that the original sentence was manifestly inadequate and did not reflect the seriousness of the offence. The appeal was allowed and a sentence of three years imprisonment, along with the existing disqualification from obtaining or holding a driver's licence for five years, was substituted. The Court held that the original sentence did not adequately reflect the serious consequences of the respondent's actions, which resulted in the death of one pedestrian and grievous bodily harm to two others. The Court also noted the respondent's criminal history, his unlicensed and unsupervised status at the time of the offence, and his lack of remorse as aggravating factors. The Court emphasised the need for consistency in sentencing and the importance of considering the maximum penalty provided by statute, but also recognised that no two cases are exactly alike and that the level of sentence in one case can only be a rough guide to another. The Court concluded that a sentence of three years imprisonment, while heavy, was necessary to achieve proportionality and to reflect the seriousness of the offence.

Orders