R v KAC

[2010] QCA 39

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v KAC [2010] QCA 39

PARTIES:

R
v
KAC
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 243 of 2009
DC No 119 of 2009

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

5 March 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

18 February 2010

JUDGES:

Chief Justice and Keane and Holmes JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – where applicant convicted on a guilty plea of nine counts of indecently dealing with a child with circumstances of aggravation, three counts of rape, and three counts of possession of child exploitation material – where applicant sentenced to 12 years imprisonment with an automatic serious violent offence declaration – whether sentence manifestly excessive

Baxter v The Queen (2007) 173 A Crim R 284; [2007] NSWCCA 237, cited
R v AAI [2009] QCA 253, cited
R v Burke [2002] NSWCCA 353, applied
R v Dickeson; ex parte A-G; R v Dickeson[2004] QCA 78, cited
R v MAZ [2008] QCA 110, cited
R v MBG & MBH [2009] QCA 252, cited
R v NK[2008] QCA 403, cited

COUNSEL:

S J Hamlyn-Harris for the applicant
M J Copley SC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions for the respondent

1. CHIEF JUSTICE:  I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment of Keane JA.  I agree that the application should be refused, for those reasons.

1. KEANE JA:  On 24 August 2009 the applicant was convicted on his own plea of nine counts of indecently dealing with a child with circumstances of aggravation, three counts of rape, and three counts of possession of child exploitation material.

1. On 28 August 2009 the applicant was sentenced to an overall sentence of 12 years imprisonment with an automatic serious violent offence declaration.  The learned sentencing judge declared 763 days of pre-sentence custody to be time served under the sentence.

1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against his sentence, contending that the learned sentencing judge made specific errors in his reasoning and, in addition, that the sentence was manifestly excessive.  I will examine these contentions after summarising (as briefly as possible) the circumstances of the applicant's offending, the applicant's personal circumstances and the relevant aspects of the reasoning of the learned sentencing judge.

The circumstances of the offences

1. The offences were committed between 1 September 2006 and 17 April 2007.  They involved five children.  In relation to three of the children, the applicant took photographs of them focusing on each child's underwear, legs and genitalia.  These photographs were taken for his own sexual gratification.  He kept 46,442 images on compact discs, and 20,242 images in the hard drive of his…