R v Legge No. Sccrm-98-83 Judgment No. S6725

R v LEGGE

Court of Criminal Appeal: Doyle CJ, Williams and Bleby JJ

DOYLE CJ

This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence.
The applicant pleaded guilty to one count of producing cannabis and was sentenced to imprisonment for four months. The sentence was suspended upon the applicant entering into a bond in the amount of $500 with the condition that she be of good behaviour for a period of 18 months.
Leave to appeal against sentence was refused by Prior J.
By application dated 15 May 1998, the applicant applied to have determined by the Full Court her application for leave to appeal against sentence.
The application was considered by the Full Court in private pursuant to Rule 15(7) of the Supreme Court Criminal Appeal Rules.
The application was considered by a court comprising me, Williams and Bleby JJ.
We are unanimously of the opinion that leave to appeal should be refused.
We do not consider that there is any reasonable prospect of the court finding that the sentence is excessive. We regard it as quite a merciful sentence, even though some judges might have been even more lenient.
We do not consider that there is any particular substance in the points made based upon the number of plants. Parliament has fixed upon the number of plants as determining the penalty range, and in that respect we consider that the sentencing judge was right. Whatever one may think about the purpose for which the cannabis was produced, the fact is that Parliament has made the production unlawful and we consider that there must be real limits to the extent to which the court can reduce the penalty on the basis that the cannabis was to be used for medicinal purposes.
The sentencing remarks disclose no error. They suggest that the sentencing judge took into account everything that he should have taken into account. Accordingly, it appears that the appeal has no reasonable prospect of success. Nor does it raise any point of principle.
The order of the court is that leave to appeal against sentence be refused.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Legge No. Sccrm-98-83 involved the applicant, who had pleaded guilty to producing cannabis and was subsequently sentenced to four months of imprisonment, suspended upon entering a bond of $500 and the condition of good behaviour for 18 months. The applicant sought leave to appeal against the sentence, which was initially refused by Prior J. The Full Court, comprising Doyle CJ, Williams, and Bleby JJ, was then asked to reconsider this refusal.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether there was a reasonable prospect that the sentence imposed was excessive or contained an error that warranted an appeal. The Full Court also considered the arguments based on the number of cannabis plants involved, and whether the medicinal purpose for which the cannabis was produced should have influenced the sentence.

The Full Court found that the sentence was merciful and that there was no reasonable prospect that the appeal would succeed. The court held that the sentencing judge had considered all relevant factors and that Parliament's determination of the penalty range based on the number of plants was valid. The Full Court emphasized the importance of respecting legislative intent, even when the purpose of the cannabis production might be considered medicinal. The court concluded that the appeal did not raise any significant points of principle or suggest any errors in the sentencing remarks. Accordingly, the Full Court refused the applicant's application for leave to appeal against sentence.

The final order of the court was that leave to appeal against the sentence be refused, maintaining the original decision of Prior J.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established