R -v- GRIFFITHS [1999] WASCA 23

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[1999] WASCA 23
Court:	COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Case No:	CCA:203/1998	Heard:	13 MAY 1999
Coram:	KENNEDY J IPP J WALLWORK J	Delivered:	24/05/99
No of pages:	6	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal allowed
PDF Version

Parties:	THE QUEEN MARK RAYMOND GRIFFITHS
Catchwords:	Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Sexual offences Three counts of digital penetration, one count of attempted digital penetration, 10 counts of indecent assault Six victims Sentence of 6 years' imprisonment substituted for sentence of 4 years' imprisonment
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Nil, Bowdidge v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 920191; 3 April 1992 Coulter v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960507; 4 September 1996 Dao v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990015; 22 January 1999 Dempsey v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960059; 9 February 1996 Jarvis v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 930341; 14 June 1993 Miles v The Queen (1997) 17 WAR 518 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 72 ALJR 1416 R v Dinsdale, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990021; 2 February 1999 R v Estreich, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 950500; 2 August 1995 R v Grein [1989] WAR 178 R v Pinder (1992) 8 WAR 19 R v Podirsky (1989) 43 A Crim R 404 R v Ruane (1979) 1 A Crim R 284 R v Shaw (1989) 39 A Crim R 343 R v Tait (1979) 46 FLR 386 Smedley v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 990146; 23 March 1999 Wong v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 980218; 2 April 1998 Woods v The Queen (1994) 14 WAR 341

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : R -v- GRIFFITHS [1999] WASCA 23 CORAM : KENNEDY J

IPP J

WALLWORK J

HEARD : 13 MAY 1999 DELIVERED : 24 MAY 1999 FILE NO/S : CCA 203 of 1998 BETWEEN : THE QUEEN

Appellant

AND

MARK RAYMOND GRIFFITHS

Respondent

Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Sexual offences - Three counts of digital penetration, one count of attempted digital penetration, 10 counts of indecent assault - Six victims - Sentence of 6 years' imprisonment substituted for sentence of 4 years' imprisonment

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Appeal allowed

(Page 2)

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr R E Cock QC & Mr P D Yovich

Respondent : Mr P S Murray

Solicitors:

Appellant : Acting State Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent : Marks Healy Sands

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Nil.

Case(s) also cited:
Bowdidge v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 920191; 3 April 1992
Coulter v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960507; 4 September 1996
Dao v The Queen, unreported; CCA…

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.

Continue reading R v Griffiths

Details

AGLC: R v Griffiths [1999] WASCA 23
Case: [1999] WASCA 23
Decision Date: 24 MAY 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, the case of R v Griffiths involved a defendant convicted on multiple counts related to sexual offences. Griffiths was found guilty of three counts of digital penetration, one count of attempted digital penetration, and ten counts of indecent assault against six victims. The case concerned the appropriate sentence to be imposed on Griffiths, with the original sentence being four years' imprisonment. The Crown appealed the sentence, arguing that it was manifestly inadequate given the severity and impact of the crimes.

The central legal issues the court had to address were the principles of sentencing for sexual offences and the appropriateness of the sentence in light of the gravity of the crimes committed. The court considered the need for the sentence to reflect the seriousness of the offences, the need for deterrence, and the necessity of protecting the community. The court also took into account the impact on the victims and the importance of proportionality in sentencing.

The court found that the original sentence did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offences. The crimes were of a particularly heinous nature, involving multiple victims and a significant breach of trust. The court held that the original sentence failed to provide sufficient punishment and deterrence. In light of this, the court allowed the appeal and substituted a sentence of six years' imprisonment for the original four-year sentence. The court emphasised the importance of proportionality in sentencing and the need to ensure that the sentence appropriately reflected the gravity of the crimes committed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal allowed

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.