R v MacDermott

COURT OF APPEAL

[1996] QCA 557

McPHERSON JA
DOWSETT J

WHITE J

CA No 388 of 1996
THE QUEEN
v.

HELEN LOUISE MacDERMOTT

Applicant

BRISBANE
..DATE 12/11/96
121196 T29/JB M/T COA282/96
DOWSETT J: This is an application for leave to appeal against
sentences passed in respect of seven counts of misappropriation.

The applicant and her husband were both charged and convicted of offences arising out of the use of credit cards. The applicant is 35 years old, having been born on 5 January 1961.

The circumstances of the case are not otherwise relevant for reasons which will appear. We have had the benefit of certain information provided to us by the applicant in the course of argument which indicates that her son is presently suffering a certain medical condition which requires continued attention. We also have been told of certain other circumstances surrounding the commission of the offences in question.

We are inclined to the view that it is appropriate that we intervene in this case. The original sentence was, with respect to three of the counts, imprisonment for two and a half years, and on the other counts imprisonment for two years, with a recommendation for parole after nine months.

For the reasons which I have given, we will reduce the recommendation for parole so that she may be considered for parole after serving a period of four months. It is unlikely that this decision will constitute a useful precedent in other cases.

McPHERSON JA: I agree.

WHITE J: I agree also.
121196 T29/JB M/T COA282/96
McPHERSON JA: The order of the Court is that the application
for leave to appeal is granted. The appeal is allowed to the
extent of reducing the period before the applicant is considered
for parole from nine months, as stated in the original orders,
to four months. That will be the order of the Court.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Court of Appeal, the case of The Queen versus Helen Louise MacDermott pertains to an appeal against sentences imposed for seven counts of misappropriation. The applicant, Helen Louise MacDermott, was convicted alongside her husband for offences related to credit card misuse. Helen, born on 5 January 1961 and aged 35 at the time of the appeal, sought leave to appeal the severity of her sentences, which included imprisonment terms ranging from two to two and a half years, with an initial parole eligibility after nine months.

The legal issues before the Court involved the appropriateness of the original sentences and the subsequent parole eligibility period. The Court considered the circumstances of the offence and personal mitigating factors presented, such as the health condition of the applicant's son, which required ongoing medical attention. The Court's role was to determine if the original sentence was excessive or inappropriate in light of these mitigating factors and if the parole eligibility period was adequately reflective of the case's circumstances.

The Court, after reviewing the evidence and arguments, found that the original sentences were indeed harsh and that the parole eligibility period should be reduced. The judges agreed that the applicant's personal circumstances warranted a more lenient approach. Consequently, the Court granted the leave to appeal and adjusted the parole eligibility period from nine months to four months. The decision emphasised that while it provided relief in this particular case, it was not intended to set a precedent for similar cases.

The final order of the Court was to allow the appeal in part by reducing the parole eligibility period from nine months to four months, thereby granting the applicant a more timely opportunity for parole consideration.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established