R v Haugland

[2009] QCA 46

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Haugland [2009] QCA 46

PARTIES:

R
v
HAUGLAND, Kelly-Anne Theresa
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 27 of 2009
DC No 708 of 2008

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Beenleigh

DELIVERED ON:

6 March 2009

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

3 March 2009

JUDGES:

Keane and Muir JJA and Daubney J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

The application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – where the applicant pleaded guilty to an offence of stealing as a servant and an offence of fraud in excess of $5,000 – where the applicant was sentenced to four months imprisonment and two years probation for the stealing offence and to two years imprisonment suspended after four months with an operational period of two years and four months for the fraud offence – whether the primary judge erred in failing to take into account various considerations including the applicant’s work history, tertiary studies and lack of prior criminal history – whether sentence was manifestly excessive

R v Irlam; ex parte A-G [2002] QCA 235, cited
R v La Rosa; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2006] QCA 19, considered
R v Robinson; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2004] QCA 169, considered
R v Singh [2005] QCA 403, considered
R v Tilley (1991) 53 A Crim R 1, cited

COUNSEL:

T L Williamson for the applicant
D R Kinsella for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Ian W Bartels & Associates for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

1. KEANE JA:  I have read the reasons for judgment prepared by Muir JA.  I agree with those reasons and with the order proposed by his Honour.

1. MUIR JA:  The applicant seeks leave to appeal against sentences imposed on her in the District Court on 2 February 2009, after pleas of guilty, for an offence of stealing as a servant and an offence of fraud in an amount in excess of $5,000.  She was sentenced to four months imprisonment and two years probation for the stealing offence and to two years imprisonment suspended after four months with an operational period of two years and four months for the fraud offence.  It is submitted on the applicant's behalf that the sentences were manifestly excessive in that wholly suspended sentences should have been imposed.

1. The applicant was 21 at the time of the offences and had no relevant criminal history.  The applicant performed well at school, both scholastically and in sport.  After finishing her schooling at Year 12, she obtained a Justice Diploma from a TAFE college, which she used to obtain enrolment in 2005 in a degree course at Queensland University of Technology.  The applicant had two operations for ovarian cancer in 2008 and a medical report…