R v DAZ

The applicant, DAZ, appealed against his sentence in a case where he had pleaded guilty to multiple offences including entering premises and stealing, burglary, attempted armed robbery, robbery, and fraud. The trial court imposed a sentence of 18 months detention for each of the burglary, attempted armed robbery, and robbery with personal violence, and three months detention for each of the entering premises and stealing, entering premises and attempted stealing, and fraud. The applicant argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive and that the sentencing judge had not adequately considered factors such as his background and co-operation. The applicant also contended that the court should have made a conditional release order under the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld), s 220.

The court identified the key issue as whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, taking into account the relevant statutory provisions and the circumstances of the applicant. The court considered the principles of sentencing under the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) and the factors that should be weighed in determining an appropriate sentence. The court noted the applicant's background and his efforts to refrain from further offending. The court concluded that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the applicant's background and the mitigating factors presented. The court found that the sentencing judge had not adequately considered the relevant factors and that a conditional release order should have been made.

The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was set aside. The applicant was ordered to be sentenced to 12 months detention with an immediate suspension of sentence and release, subject to a conditional release order, on certain counts. For the remaining counts, the applicant was to be placed on probation for two years. Convictions were not to be recorded. The court also amended the order sheet to correct a clerical error.