Legal Research
Cases
R v Knowles

R v Knowles

Case [2007] SASC 185 23 May 2007

Statutory Interpretation

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
(Court of Criminal Appeal)
R v KNOWLES
[2007] SASC 185
Judgment of The Court of Criminal Appeal
(The Honourable Justice Duggan, The Honourable Justice Gray and The Honourable Justice White)
23 May 2007
CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE
Appeal against sentence - appellant sentenced for 50 offences - some indictable offences and some summary offences - some offences not punishable by imprisonment - appellant sentenced for all offences pursuant to s 18A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 to imprisonment for 16 years and six months with a non-parole period of 10 years - whether judge erred in applying s 18A.
Held: judge erred in imposing a single sentence pursuant to s 18A - a sentence of imprisonment pursuant to s 18A cannot be imposed in respect of offences not punishable by imprisonment - appellant re-sentenced - (by majority) head sentence of 14 years and three months imprisonment with a non-parole period of nine years imposed for all offences attracting a sentence of imprisonment - convictions recorded and no further penalty imposed for offences not punishable by imprisonment - appellant disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for a period of 12 months - firearm seized to be forfeited to the Crown and appellant disqualified from holding or obtaining a firearm licence until further order.
Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA), s 13, s 18A; Motor Vehicles Act 1959 (SA), s 9, s 74, s 102; Firearms Act 1977 (SA), s 11, s 34A; Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA), s 19, s 29, s 47A, s 85, s 86A, s 134, s 137, s 139, s 169; Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA), s 15, s 17, s 51, s 74A; Domestic Violence Act 1994 (SA), s 15; Controlled Substances Act 1984 (SA), s 32; Road Traffic Act 1961 (SA), s 42; Bail Act 1985 (SA), s 17, s 22, referred to.
Hermel v Police (2000) 76 SASR 336; Oliver v The Police [2004] SASC 8; R v Bennett [2005] SASC 55, applied.
R v Capalbo (2005) 238 LSJS 245; R v Allen (2002) 81 SASR 434; R v Gibbs (2004) 89 SASR 30; R v Simpson (2004) 89 SASR 515; R v Mathew [2001] SASC 390; R v Tu (2001) 216 LSJS 298; R v Proom (2003) 85 SASR 120; R v Symonds [1999] SASC 217; R v BRWK (2005) 91 SASR 200; R v Kench (2005) 238 LSJS 482; R v E, AD (2005) 93 SASR 20; R v Waugh (2005) 93 SASR 274; Fitzgerald v Police [2000] SASC 37; R v Jeffries [2004] SASC 188; Coombs v Police [2001] SASC 97; Sideridis v Police [2001] SASC 90; Offe v Police (2002) 84 SASR 1; R v Nylander [2003] SASC 191, considered.

R v KNOWLES
[2007] SASC 185

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 Knowles

Details

AGLC: R v Knowles [2007] SASC 185
Case: [2007] SASC 185
Decision Date: 23 May 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Knowles, appealed against his sentence for a total of 50 offences, some of which were indictable and some summary offences. The original sentencing judge had imposed a cumulative sentence of 16 years and six months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 10 years, under section 18A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of South Australia, which considered the correctness of this sentence. The court had to determine whether the judge had erred in applying section 18A in sentencing Knowles to a single term of imprisonment for all the offences.

The court examined the legal framework surrounding the application of section 18A, specifically whether the sentencing judge could impose a single term of imprisonment for both indictable and summary offences, some of which were not punishable by imprisonment. The court noted that section 18A allows for a single term of imprisonment to be imposed for multiple indictable offences, but it does not extend to summary offences that are not punishable by imprisonment. The court concluded that the judge had erred in applying section 18A to the summary offences that could not be punished by imprisonment.

The Supreme Court, by majority, held that the judge's application of section 18A was incorrect. Consequently, the court re-sentenced Knowles, imposing a head sentence of 14 years and three months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of nine years, for all offences that were punishable by imprisonment. For the offences not punishable by imprisonment, the court recorded the convictions but did not impose any further penalty. Additionally, the court disqualified Knowles from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for a period of 12 months, seized his firearm to be forfeited to the Crown, and disqualified him from holding or obtaining a firearm licence until further order.

Orders