R v Edie
Case
•
[2006] QCA 111
•13 April 2006
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
R v Edie [2006] QCA 111
[2006] QCA 111
13 April 2006
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicant in this matter appealed against the sentence handed down by the District Court, arguing that it was manifestly excessive. The applicant had pleaded guilty to 141 offences over an 18-month period, mostly burglaries, while on bail and probation. The court had given the applicant a head sentence of seven years and four months, with no recommendation for post-prison community based release. The applicant's youth and cooperation with authorities were considered in his favour. The court was required to determine whether the sentence was manifestly excessive in all the circumstances.
The court considered relevant legislation and previous cases in its decision. It noted that the applicant's youth and cooperation with authorities were mitigating factors, but also considered the seriousness of the offences and the need for deterrence. The court found that the sentence was excessive and allowed the appeal in part. The court set aside the District Court's declaration relating to time spent in custody and directed that the applicant had been in pre-sentence custody for a total of 590 days. The court also added a recommendation for post-prison community based release after one year and four months of the sentence.
The appeal was allowed in part and the sentence was modified. The court declared that the applicant had been in pre-sentence custody for a total of 590 days and directed that no time was to be taken as imprisonment already served. The court also added a recommendation for post-prison community based release after one year and four months of the sentence. The registrar was directed to advise the chief executive of corrective services in writing of these declarations and their details.
The court considered relevant legislation and previous cases in its decision. It noted that the applicant's youth and cooperation with authorities were mitigating factors, but also considered the seriousness of the offences and the need for deterrence. The court found that the sentence was excessive and allowed the appeal in part. The court set aside the District Court's declaration relating to time spent in custody and directed that the applicant had been in pre-sentence custody for a total of 590 days. The court also added a recommendation for post-prison community based release after one year and four months of the sentence.
The appeal was allowed in part and the sentence was modified. The court declared that the applicant had been in pre-sentence custody for a total of 590 days and directed that no time was to be taken as imprisonment already served. The court also added a recommendation for post-prison community based release after one year and four months of the sentence. The registrar was directed to advise the chief executive of corrective services in writing of these declarations and their details.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Criminal Liability
-
Sentencing
-
Limitation Periods
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
R v Edie [2006] QCA 111
Most Recent Citation
Hawkins v Hawkins [2009] ACTSC 148
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Hawkins v Hawkins
[2009] ACTSC 148
R v Kraaz
[2006] QCA 520
Hawkins v Hawkins
[2009] ACTSC 148
Cases Cited
12
Statutory Material Cited
2
Elias v The Queen
[2013] HCA 31
Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
[2016] FCA 413
Beqiri v The Queen
[2013] VSCA 39