R v Moors

[1992] QCA 243

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 243

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND C.A. No. 188 of 1992

T H E Q U E E N

v.

ROSS ANTHONY MOORS

(Applicant)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Delivered the 11th day of August 1992

The applicant was convicted of manslaughter on 23 April 1992 and

on 12 June 1992 was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment. He seeks leave to appeal against that sentence on the ground that it is manifestly excessive. He is 35 years of age and has two

previous criminal convictions, one on 10 December 1988 for

possession of a dangerous drug for which he was fined $250, and one on 19 October 1989 of assault occasioning bodily harm, involving his former de facto wife, for which he received a good

behaviour bond for two years.

On the date of the offence, 15 January 1992, the applicant was

living alone on a 24 acre property near Ravenshoe on the

Atherton Tableland. He had a small marijuana crop on his property. Shortly after 4 p.m. on that day three men,

travelling in a utility 4-wheel drive vehicle, visited the

property while the applicant was absent. He returned to observe

them walking in the vicinity of his house. He thought that they

were looking for his marijuana plants; stealing of such plants is not uncommon in the area. When they moved away from the

vicinity of his house he went inside and obtained an SKS assault rifle and ammunition, ear muffs and possibly a telescopic sight.

The SKS assault rifle is a .762 high powered semi-automatic

military assault rifle which fires bullets with full metal jackets capable of penetrating metal. It is a rifle designed

for killing people or large animals at quite substantial

distances.

Having obtained the rifle, the applicant secreted himself in the

bush near the vehicle and waited for the men to return to it.

They did so and as the vehicle drove away the applicant, aiming

at the tyres of the vehicle, fired two shots, one at least of which shot out a tyre. The applicant then fired a volley of at least a further twelve shots at the vehicle. He claimed to be

quite a good shot. One of them pierced the metal of the truck

and killed one of its occupants. When it was fired the vehicle was still less than fifty metres away. It was then outside the applicant's property.

Counsel for the applicant does not suggest that the sentence

imposed was not within the range for offences of this kind.

Indeed, he could not do so. The sentence is well within the

appropriate range. There was no suggestion that there was any immediate emergency or that the occupants of the vehicle were

threatening the applicant in any way.
Counsel for the applicant however said that his Honour failed to

have sufficient regard to mitigating factors, the main ones

being his remorse and the three months which the applicant spent

in custody prior to his trial.

His Honour in fact gave credit in the sentence which he imposed

of one year in respect of the time which the applicant had spent in custody and it appears from his Honour's sentencing remarks

that he took into account remorse shown by the applicant.

It was submitted that, in the circumstances, a recommendation

should have been made for early parole. We do not agree. Indeed, his Honour was concerned that the pre-sentence report

and the psychiatric report of a Dr Rigano referred to the possibility of similar over-reaction in the future, a matter

which his Honour thought might require the parole authorities who eventually had to consider the applicant's parole to do so with more than usual care.

The sentence was not manifestly excessive. The application is

refused.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND	C.A. No. 188 of 1992
Before the Court of Appeal
The President Mr Justice Pincus Mr Justice Davies

T H E Q U E E N

v.

ROSS ANTHONY MOORS

(Applicant)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Delivered the 11th day of August 1992

MINUTES OF ORDER:Application for leave to appeal refused

CATCHWORDS:CRIMINAL LAW - SENTENCE - applicant sentenced to 11 years for manslaughter - whether manifestly excessive given applicant 35 with 2 minor prior offences - applicant fired semi- automatic rifle at vehicle intruding on property - whether 3 months in custody and remorse of applicant taken into account

Counsel:Alcorn for the Applicant

Wright for the Crown

Solicitors:Legal Aid Office for the Applicant

Director of Prosecutions for the Crown

Date(s) of Hearing:11 August 1992

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND C.A. No. 188 of 1992

T H E Q U E E N

v.

ROSS ANTHONY MOORS

(Applicant)

____________________________________________________

THE PRESIDENT

PINCUS JA

DAVIES JA

____________________________________________________

Reasons for Judgment of the Court delivered the 11th day of

August 1992

____________________________________________________

"APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL REFUSED."