R v M - [2003] QCA 451

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: R v M [2003] QCA 451
PARTIES: R
v
M
(applicant)
FILE NO/S: CA No 240 of 2003 DC No 254 of 2003
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Sentence Application
ORIGINATING
COURT: District Court at Cairns
DELIVERED EX 17 October 2003
TEMPORE ON:
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 17 October 2003
JUDGES: Davies and Williams JJA and Wilson J
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 dismissed
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDER – applicant convicted on own plea of one count of rape – where sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment – where appellant showed remorse – where early plea of guilty – where applicant seeks leave to appeal against sentence – whether sentence manifestly excessive
R v George [1991] CCA 225; CA No 226 of 1991, 13 June
1991, considered
R v Stirling [1996] QCA 342; CA No 205 of 1996, 17
September 1997, considered
COUNSEL: J T Bradshaw for the applicant (pro bono)
C W Heaton for the respondent
SOLICITORS: The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the
respondent

DAVIES JA: I will ask Justice Wilson to deliver her reasons first.

WILSON J: The applicant seeks leave to appeal against a sentence of seven years' imprisonment for rape.

The offence was committed in Cairns on 15 January 2003. The complainant and the applicant, both aged about 45 years, and both members of the indigenous community, were part of a group

of people drinking in a park.

The complainant fell asleep. When she awoke, she found that five minutes. Then he simply got up, pulled up his shorts and walked off, taking her bag with him.

everyone but the applicant had gone. The complainant asked
where they were, and the applicant told her they had gone to
get wine and that she should follow him. She did so, thinking
that they were going to find the others. When they were near
to a shed, the applicant asked the complainant to sit down.
She refused, and he grabbed her by the arm and dragged her
across to the shed. He began to touch her breasts, and when
she told him to stop, he hit her on the stomach and ribs with
his elbow. She tried to get up but he grabbed her by her
clothing and pulled her back down. He pinned her to the
ground, took off her pants and underpants, opened her legs,
got on top of her and put his penis in her vagina. When she
told him to stop, he said he would "bust up” her mouth if she
opened it.

The complainant ran across the road to a female passer-by, who took her to the hospital and stayed with her until police arrived.

The complainant stayed in hospital overnight. Fortunately the…

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 M

Details

AGLC: R v M [2003] QCA 451
Case: [2003] QCA 451
Decision Date: 17/10/2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v M, the applicant, who had pleaded guilty to one count of rape, sought leave to appeal against his sentence of seven years’ imprisonment. The primary issue for the court was to determine whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, taking into account various factors such as the circumstances of the offender, the gravity of the offence, and the applicant's remorse and plea of guilty. The applicant argued that the sentence was excessively harsh, while the prosecution contended that the sentence was appropriate given the nature and impact of the offence.

The court evaluated the mitigating factors presented, including the applicant's remorse and the fact that he pleaded guilty at an early stage. Despite these considerations, the court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. It highlighted the serious nature of the offence, which involved a significant breach of trust and caused substantial harm to the victim. The court also took into account the need for the sentence to reflect the community's expectations regarding the punishment for such serious crimes.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the application for leave to appeal against the sentence, affirming that the sentence was within an acceptable range and appropriately reflected the seriousness of the crime and the circumstances of the offender. The court's decision underscored the importance of balancing the offender's remorse and early plea with the gravity of the offence and the community's expectations for justice.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	R v M [2003] QCA 451
PARTIES:	R v M (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 240 of 2003 DC No 254 of 2003
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Cairns
DELIVERED EX	17 October 2003
TEMPORE ON:
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	17 October 2003
JUDGES:	Davies and Williams JJA and Wilson J 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 dismissed
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDER – applicant convicted on own plea of one count of rape – where sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment – where appellant showed remorse – where early plea of guilty – where applicant seeks leave to appeal against sentence – whether sentence manifestly excessive
R v George [1991] CCA 225; CA No 226 of 1991, 13 June 1991, considered R v Stirling [1996] QCA 342; CA No 205 of 1996, 17 September 1997, considered
COUNSEL:	J T Bradshaw for the applicant (pro bono) C W Heaton for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent