R v Karbanowicz

[2003] QCA 543

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Karbanowicz [2003] QCA 543

PARTIES:

R
v
KARBANOWICZ, Matthew Douglas

(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 295 of 2003
DC No 465 of 2003

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

4 December 2003

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

4 December 2003

JUDGES:

McPherson and Williams JJA and McMurdo J

Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

1.   Leave to appeal granted

2.   Appeal allowed and orders below amended to provide for suspension of sentences in all cases after serving a period of nine months with an operational period still of four years overall

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENDER - whether sentence is manifestly excessive – where the offender has committed various offences, some whilst on probation order, some whilst on bail but has pleaded guilty and co-operated with the police – factor not considered at trial where particular circumstances prevent his progressing thorough a medium security correctional centre to a low security correction centre

R v Perrem, CA 119 of 2000, considered

R v Gee, CA 247 of 1998, considered

COUNSEL:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf
B G Campbell for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

McMURDO J:  The applicant seeks leave to appeal against sentences imposed in the District Court for offences to which he pleaded guilty on 8 August 2003.  There were 23 offences upon two indictments together with four summary offences. 

There were 14 offences of burglary and stealing, four further offences of stealing, one of fraud, two of unlawful use of a motor vehicle, in one case with a circumstance of aggravation, and two offences of entering premises with an intent to steal. 
The summary offences were one of being unlawfully in an enclosed yard, a bail offence and two related offences of behaving in a disorderly manner and obstructing police. 

For the 14 offences of burglary and stealing, he was sentenced to four years' imprisonment suspended after 15 months with an operational period of four years.  On the other offences on the indictments, he was sentenced to 12 months and, upon the four summary offences, four months' imprisonment.  The sentences are to be served concurrently. 

The applicant argues that these sentences are manifestly excessive. 

The offences were committed at various times from the end of 2000 when the applicant was 20 years of age.  He was 21 when sentenced.  He had a prior criminal history involving some drug matters and offences of dishonesty including one involving the entry of a dwelling and some bail offences.
Prior to the present matters, he had not been imprisoned.

On those prior matters, there were several probation orders, the most recent of which…