R v JOHN DUNBAR FOWLER
[2007] ACTCA 4 (3 April 2007)
APPEAL – sentence - possession of child pornography - whether appropriate to serve by way of periodic detention - gravity of offence - good character
Crimes Act 1900, s 65
Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005, s 11
Supreme Court Act 1933, s 37E
Griffiths v The Queen (1977) 137 CLR 293
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
R v Liddington (1997) 18 WAR 394
Jones (1999) 108 A Crim R 50
Queen v Fellows [1997] 2 All ER 548
RvLeroy (1984) 2 NSWLR 441
Mears (1991) 53 A Crim R 141
Prior v Malogorski (2005) 156 A Crim R 122
Everett v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 295
R v Wilton (1981) 28 SASR
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
No. ACTCA 26 - 2006
No. SCC 59 of 2006
Judges: Higgins CJ, Connolly and Tamberlin JJ
Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory
Date: 3 April 2007
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE ) No. ACTCA 26 - 2006
) No. SCC 59 of 2006
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )
)
COURT OF APPEAL )
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
BETWEEN:THE QUEEN
Appellant
AND: JOHN DUNBAR FOWLER
Respondent
ORDER
Judges: Higgins CJ, Connolly and Tamberlin JJ
Date: 3 April 2007
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The appeal be dismissed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE ) No. ACTCA 26 - 2006
) No. SCC 59 of 2006
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )
)
COURT OF APPEAL )
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
BETWEEN: THE QUEEN
Appellant
AND: JOHN DUNBAR FOWLER
Respondent
Judges: Higgins CJ, Connolly and Tamberlin JJ
Date: 3 April 2007
Place: Canberra
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT:
This is a Crown appeal against the sentence imposed on the respondent, John Dunbar Fowler, in respect of one count of possessing child pornography, contrary to s 65 of the Crimes Act 1900. The respondent pleaded guilty to this offence on 14 March 2006 in the Magistrates Court and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. On 2 June 2006 he appeared before Justice Crispin for sentencing. He was convicted and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment to be served by way of periodic detention, and placed on a good behaviour order for three years, during which he was subject to supervision by the Director of the ACT Corrective Services and was obliged to accept directions in relation to rehabilitation or psychotherapy.
The Director of Public Prosecutions conceded that the starting point in his Honour’s reasoning was appropriate, in that for this type of offence general deterrence and community standards demand a custodial…
Continue reading R v Fowler
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Fowler [2007] ACTCA 4
- Case
- [2007] ACTCA 4
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the sentencing judge had erred in imposing a sentence of periodic detention, rather than a full-time custodial sentence, for the offence of possessing child pornography. The court was required to consider the gravity of the offence and the respondent's character in determining the appropriateness of the sentence imposed.
The Full Court upheld the sentencing judge's decision, finding that periodic detention was an appropriate sentence in the circumstances. The court acknowledged the seriousness of child pornography offences but considered that the sentencing judge had properly balanced this gravity with other relevant factors, including the respondent's good character and the potential for rehabilitation. The court did not consider that the sentencing judge had made an error of principle in imposing periodic detention.
The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
The appeal be dismissed.
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.