R v Matthews

Case [2007] QCA 144


SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Matthews [2007] QCA 144

PARTIES:

R
v
MATTHEWS, Brett Allan
(applicant/appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 21 of 2007
SC No 14 of 2007
SC No 15 of 2007
SC No 5 of 2007

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

4 May 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

17 April 2007

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Holmes JA and Lyons J
Judgment of the Court

ORDER:

1. Application for leave granted
2. Appeal allowed
3. Sentence varied by substituting a sentence of nine years imprisonment and setting aside the declaration of a serious violent offence; the declaration of a pre-sentence custody period of 366 days is maintained

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS – APPLICATIONS TO REDUCE SENTENCE – WHEN GRANTED – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – GENERALLY – where the applicant was sentenced, on a plea of guilty, to 10 years imprisonment for manslaughter – whether the trial judge erred in employing a notional head sentence of 12 to 13 years – whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive

R v Auberson[1996] QCA 321; CA No 248 of 1996, 3 September 1996, cited
R v Bojovic [2000] 2 Qd R 183, cited
R v Clark; ex parte A-G [1999] QCA 438; CA No 68 of 1999, 22 October 1999, considered
R v Cummins[1999] QCA 117; CA No 376 of 1998, 16 April 1999, cited
R v DeSalvo (2002) 127 A Crim R 229, considered
R v George; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2004] QCA 450; CA No 316 of 2004, 26 November 2004, cited
R v Katia; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2006] QCA 300; CA No 111 of 2006, 22 August 2006, considered

R v McDougall & Collas [2006] QCA 365; CA No 83 of 2006, 22 September 2006, cited

COUNSEL:

R A East for the applicant/appellant
M J Copley for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant/appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

  1. THE COURT: The applicant for leave to appeal against sentence, Brett Allan Matthews, pleaded guilty on ex officio indictments to one count of manslaughter, one count of unlawfully possessing a motor vehicle with circumstances of aggravation, two counts of fraud and two counts of stealing.  He also pleaded guilty to two charges of driving while disqualified. 

  1. The charge of unlawful killing arose when the applicant in a fit of amphetamine induced rage strangled Kelly Walsh because he wrongly believed that she had been involved in a burglary at his home which had led to his wife’s suffering a miscarriage when she gave chase to burglars.  The applicant’s belief had been induced by his ingestion of amphetamine and it was clear that both he and Ms Walsh had consumed excessive amounts of drugs and alcohol prior to Ms Walsh’s…

Continue reading R v Matthews

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Matthews [2007] QCA 144
Case
[2007] QCA 144
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Matthews, was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. Matthews appealed against the sentence, arguing that the trial judge erred in employing a notional head sentence of 12 to 13 years, and that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. Matthews submitted that the trial judge failed to adequately consider the mitigating factors, including the lack of intent to cause death and Matthews’ otherwise good character. The primary judge found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and dismissed the appeal.

The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge erred in employing a notional head sentence of 12 to 13 years, and whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The court considered the principles of sentencing in relation to manslaughter and the need to ensure that the sentence reflects the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances of the offender. The court also considered the mitigating factors, including the lack of intent to cause death and Matthews’ otherwise good character.

The court found that the trial judge erred in employing a notional head sentence of 12 to 13 years, as this was not supported by the circumstances of the case. The court also found that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, as it did not adequately take into account the mitigating factors. The court varied the sentence by substituting a sentence of nine years imprisonment and setting aside the declaration of a serious violent offence. The declaration of a pre-sentence custody period of 366 days was maintained. The appeal was allowed and the application for leave was granted.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Application for leave granted

2. Appeal allowed

3. Sentence varied by substituting a sentence of nine years imprisonment and setting aside the declaration of a serious violent offence; the declaration of a pre-sentence custody period of 366 days is maintained

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.