R v HBV
Case
•
[2019] QCA 21
•19 February 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
R v HBV [2019] QCA 21
[2019] QCA 21
19 February 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this case, the applicant, HBV, sought leave to appeal against the sentence imposed by the trial judge. HBV was a juvenile who was convicted of one count of armed robbery with actual violence committed in company. The applicant was sentenced to nine months detention. The appeal was based on the contention that the trial judge erred in considering irrelevant matters and that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or inadequate, and if the trial judge had erred in considering irrelevant matters.
The Court of Appeal considered whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly excessive or inadequate. The Court noted that the trial judge had considered a number of matters that were not relevant to the sentencing process. The Court held that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and that the trial judge had erred in considering irrelevant matters. The Court of Appeal concluded that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and that the applicant was entitled to appeal against the sentence.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and confirmed the sentence of detention of nine months. However, the Court suspended the detention order and released the applicant from detention immediately. The Court ordered that the applicant be subject to a conditional release order for a period of three months. The Court further ordered that the applicant must participate in a program directed by the Chief Executive of Youth Justice Services, must abstain from violation of the law, comply with reasonable directions, report and receive visits as directed, notify the Chief Executive of any changes to address, employment or school, and must not leave or stay out of Queensland without prior approval. The Court did not record a conviction against the applicant.
The final orders of the Court of Appeal were that leave to appeal was granted, the appeal was allowed, the sentence of detention of nine months was confirmed, the detention order was suspended and the applicant was immediately released from detention, a conditional release order was made for a period of three months, and a conviction was not recorded.
The Court of Appeal considered whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly excessive or inadequate. The Court noted that the trial judge had considered a number of matters that were not relevant to the sentencing process. The Court held that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and that the trial judge had erred in considering irrelevant matters. The Court of Appeal concluded that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and that the applicant was entitled to appeal against the sentence.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and confirmed the sentence of detention of nine months. However, the Court suspended the detention order and released the applicant from detention immediately. The Court ordered that the applicant be subject to a conditional release order for a period of three months. The Court further ordered that the applicant must participate in a program directed by the Chief Executive of Youth Justice Services, must abstain from violation of the law, comply with reasonable directions, report and receive visits as directed, notify the Chief Executive of any changes to address, employment or school, and must not leave or stay out of Queensland without prior approval. The Court did not record a conviction against the applicant.
The final orders of the Court of Appeal were that leave to appeal was granted, the appeal was allowed, the sentence of detention of nine months was confirmed, the detention order was suspended and the applicant was immediately released from detention, a conditional release order was made for a period of three months, and a conviction was not recorded.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Sentencing
-
Miscarriage of Justice
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
R v HBV [2019] QCA 21
Most Recent Citation
R v WBP [2022] QCA 9
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
1
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (The Bendigo Theatre Case) (No 2)
[2018] FCA 1211
PNJ v The Queen
[2009] HCA 6
R v SCU
[2017] QCA 198