R v Lynch - [1999] QCA 274

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL	[1999] QCA 274
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CA No 36 of 1999

Brisbane

[R v Lynch]

THE QUEEN

DALE STEPHEN LYNCH

(Applicant) Appellant
Pincus JA Davies JA Demack J

Judgment delivered 23 July 1999
Judgment of the Court

1.          APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE GRANTED; APPEAL ALLOWED.
2.          SET ASIDE THE SENTENCES IMPOSED BELOW AND THE ORDER THAT THE WHOLE OF THE SUSPENDED SENTENCE BE SERVED CUMULATIVELY UPON THE SENTENCES IMPOSED.
3.          SUBSTITUTE A SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS IMPRISONMENT FOR THE TRAFFICKING OFFENCE.
4.          SUBSTITUTE SENTENCES OF ONE AND A HALF YEARS IMPRISONMENT FOR EACH OF THE OFFENCES OF RECEIVING AND EACH OF THE OFFENCES OF UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE, AND SENTENCES OF SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT FOR EACH OF THE OTHER OFFENCES THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEAL ALL TO BE SERVED CONCURRENTLY.
5.          ORDER THAT THE SENTENCE FOR TRAFFICKING BE SERVED CUMULATIVELY UPON THE SENTENCES OF ONE AND A HALF YEARS IMPRISONMENT.
6.          ORDER THAT THE APPLICANT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE AFTER SERVING ONE AND A HALF YEARS OF THAT TOTAL TERM.
7.          ORDER THAT THE WHOLE OF THE SUSPENDED SENTENCE BE SERVED CONCURRENTLY WITH THE ABOVE SENTENCES.
8.          DECLARE THAT A PERIOD OF 256 DAYS FROM 21 MAY 1998 TO 1 FEBRUARY 1999 BE IMPRISONMENT ALREADY SERVED UNDER THE SENTENCES.
9.          ORDER THAT THE APPLICANT PAY TO THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND THE SUM OF FIVE THOUSAND AND FIFTY DOLLARS ($5,050) BY WAY OF PECUNIARY PENALTY PURSUANT TO S 17 AND S 34 OF THE CRIMES (CONFISCATION) ACT 1989, THAT BEING THE VALUE OF THE BENEFIT DERIVED FROM THE COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENCE.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT - SENTENCE - CONCURRENT, CUMULATIVE AND ADDITIONAL SENTENCES, SENTENCES ON ESCAPE AND COMMENCEMENT OF SENTENCE - SENTENCES ON TWO OR MORE COUNTS

Application for leave to appeal against sentence - applicant convicted of numerous offences including trafficking in amphetamines, receiving stolen property, unlawful possession of a motor vehicle, possession of a dangerous drug and breach of a suspended sentence - sentenced to a total period of six years, four months imprisonment - evidence trying to overcome drug addiction - prospect of rehabilitation - whether sentence manifestly excessive - whether the judge below had to activate the suspended sentence cumulatively on the current sentences - whether total term of imprisonment too high.
Cuddy (1988) 37 A Crim R 226, considered
Gordon & Camp v Whybrow (CA No 10 of 1998, 24 March 1998),
considered

R v Simpson (CA No 140 of 1995, 11 July 1995), considered
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 s 148(b)

Counsel:	Applicant/appellant appeared on his own behalf Mr J Henry for respondent
Solicitors:	Applicant/appellant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent
Hearing Date:	16 June 1999

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - THE COURT

Judgment delivered 23 July 1999

On 1 February this year the applicant pleaded guilty in the Supreme Court to a number of offences. He was…

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 Lynch

Details

AGLC: R v Lynch [1999] QCA 274
Case: [1999] QCA 274
Decision Date: 23/07/1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Lynch involved the applicant, Dale Stephen Lynch, appealing against the sentence imposed on him by the Supreme Court of Queensland. Lynch was convicted of multiple offences, including trafficking in amphetamines, receiving stolen property, unlawful possession of a motor vehicle, possession of a dangerous drug, and breach of a suspended sentence. The Supreme Court sentenced Lynch to a total period of six years and four months imprisonment, with eligibility for parole after serving two years. Lynch's appeal focused on the severity of the sentence and the manner in which the suspended sentence was to be served.

The primary legal issues addressed by the Court of Appeal were whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, whether the suspended sentence should have been served cumulatively on the current sentences, and whether the total term of imprisonment was too high. The Court considered the nature of the offences, Lynch's criminal history, and the principles of sentencing, particularly the need to balance punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

The Court of Appeal found that while the sentence for the trafficking offence, which was imposed cumulatively, was justified due to its serious nature, the total sentence of six years and four months was excessive. The Court noted mitigating factors such as Lynch's early guilty plea and his efforts to overcome drug addiction. It was decided that a more appropriate total sentence would be four and a half years, with parole eligibility after one and a half years. The Court also corrected the error in the original sentence regarding the suspended term, ordering it to be served concurrently with the new sentences. The final orders included a reduction in the trafficking sentence to three years, concurrent sentences for the other offences, and adjustments to parole eligibility and the suspended sentence.

Orders