R v Melissant

[2003] QCA 122

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	R v Melissant [2003] QCA 122
PARTIES:	R v MELISSANT, Cornelius John (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 443 of 2002 SC No 116 of 2002
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING
COURT:	Supreme Court at Mackay
DELIVERED EX	19 March 2003
TEMPORE ON:
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	19 March 2003
JUDGES:	de Jersey CJ, Williams JA and Atkinson J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – where applicant pleaded guilty to one count unlawful wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm – where applicant sentenced to six years imprisonment with a declaration he had been convicted of a serious violent offence – where effect of the declaration was that the applicant would not be eligible for a post-prison community based release order until 80 per cent of the sentence of imprisonment was served – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive
Corrective Services Act 2000 (Qld), s 135(2) Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 161B(3)
Brown (2000) 110 ACrimR 499, cited R v Bojevich [2002] 2 Qd R 183, applied R v Dempsey [2001] QCA 141; CA No 356 or 2000, 17 April 2001, considered
COUNSEL:	B G Devereaux for the applicant B G Campbell for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

ATKINSON J: On the morning the applicant was due to stand trial in the Supreme Court in Mackay, he pleaded guilty to unlawfully wounding Shellie Marie Burston with intent to do

grievous bodily harm. This guilty plea was accepted in

discharge of an indictment on which he was also charged with	10
attempting unlawfully to kill Ms Burston. He was sentenced on the following day, 27 November 2002, to six years imprisonment with a declaration that he had been convicted of a serious
violent offence. The 58 days of pre-sentence custody were
declared to be time already served under the sentence of	20
imprisonment.
The circumstances of the offence were that the complainant,
Ms Burston, and the applicant had been in a turbulent
relationship for some years with several separations. A child	30
of the relationship was born in 1997. The applicant was the
subject of a domestic violence order in relation to the
complainant. In October 2000, the complainant moved out of
the house that she shared with the applicant and returned to
live with her parents. In January 2001, she moved into a	40
house of her own opposite her parents' house. It seems that the relationship was ongoing and that the applicant would, on occasions, turn up at the house and stayed the night.
On 24 October 2001, the applicant turned up at the	50
complainant's house and there was an argument. On 25 October 2001, the applicant returned, and…