R v MBM

[2011] QCA 100

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v MBM [2011] QCA 100

PARTIES:

R
v
MBM
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 46 of 2011
DC No 2306 of 2010

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

17 May 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

5 May 2011

JUDGES:

Fraser, Chesterman and White JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

Grant the application in respect of count one.1.         

Allow the appeal.2.         

Set aside the sentence imposed below and in lieu thereof sentence the appellant to a term of imprisonment of 12 months to be suspended after serving three months with an operational period of two years.3.         

Refuse the application with respect to count two.4.         

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – where the applicant pleaded guilty to one count of knowingly possessing child exploitation material and one count of making child exploitation material – whether the sentence given by the primary judge was manifestly excessive

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 207A, s 228C(1), s 228D
Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Act 2005 (Qld)
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9(2)(a)

R v Campbell (2009) 195 A Crim R 374; [2009] QCA 128, cited
R v Carmichael & Armbruster [2009] QCA 41, considered
R v Carson (2008) 187 A Crim R 435; [2008] QCA 268, cited
R v GAE; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2008] QCA 128, considered
R v Garget-Bennett [2010] QCA 231, cited
R v Grehan (2010) 199 A Crim R 408; [2010] QCA 42, cited
R v Oliver [2003] 1 Cr App R 28; [2002] EWCA Crim 2766, considered
R v Plunkett[2006] QCA 182, cited
R v Quick;ex parte A-G (Qld) (2006) 166 A Crim R 588; [2006] QCA 477, considered
R v Richardson; ex parte A-G (Qld) (2007) 175 A Crim R 244; [2007] QCA 294, cited
R v Riley[2007] QCA 391, cited
R v Rogers[2009] QCA 10, considered
R v Salsone; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2008] QCA 220, considered
R v Smith[2010] QCA 220, cited
R v Sykes[2009] QCA 267, cited
R v Vantoosten[2009] QCA 54, cited
R v Wharley (2007) 175 A Crim R 253; [2007] QCA 295, considered

COUNSEL:

M P van der Walt for the applicant
M J Copley SC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Fowler Lawyers for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

[1]      FRASER JA:  I agree with the reasons for judgment of White JA and the orders proposed by her Honour.

[2]      CHESTERMAN JA:  I agree with the orders proposed by White JA for the reasons given by her Honour.

[3]      WHITE JA:  On 10 December 2010 the applicant pleaded guilty…