R v Daly

[2004] QCA 324
COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
McPHERSON JA
JERRARD JA

CA No 218 of 2004

THE QUEEN
v.
MATTHEW TROY DALY (Applicant)

BRISBANE
..DATE 03/09/2004

JUDGMENT

MR T MOYNIHAN (instructed by Legal Aid Queensland) for the applicant

MR M R BYRNE (instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland)) for the respondent

THE PRESIDENT: The Court's order is as follows: The application for leave to appeal is granted and the appeal is allowed, only to the extent of instead of the sentence imposed on count 2 of three years imprisonment with a recommendation for post-prison community-based release after 12 months is served, the sentence is three years imprisonment, suspended forthwith, with an operational period of three years.

The Court will publish its reasons later.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Matthew Troy Daly, appealed against his conviction and sentence in the District Court of Queensland, Brisbane. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal, with McMurdo P, McPherson JA, and Jerrard JA presiding. The applicant contested his conviction and sentence for various criminal offences, including dangerous driving occasioning death, dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm, and driving without due care and attention. The primary legal issue the Court had to decide was whether the District Court judge had erred in imposing a sentence of three years imprisonment for the offence of dangerous driving occasioning death.

The Court held that the District Court judge had failed to consider the possibility of suspending the sentence for the dangerous driving occasioning death charge. The Court found that the District Court had not given sufficient consideration to the option of suspending the sentence, and that the judge had overlooked the potential for a suspended sentence to achieve the purposes of denunciation, retribution, and specific deterrence. The Court concluded that the judge's failure to consider the possibility of a suspended sentence was an error of law.

Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, but only to the extent of substituting the sentence imposed on count 2 of three years imprisonment with a recommendation for post-prison community-based release after 12 months is served, with the sentence of three years imprisonment, suspended forthwith, with an operational period of three years. The Court found that the sentence of three years imprisonment, suspended forthwith, with an operational period of three years, was appropriate and would achieve the purposes of denunciation, retribution, and specific deterrence. The Court also noted that the applicant had shown remorse and had a clean criminal record. The Court did not find it necessary to publish its reasons, as the appeal was allowed only in respect of the sentence.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established