R v Morris; ex parte

[2004] QCA 463

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: 

R v Morris; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2004] QCA 463

PARTIES: 

R
v
MORRIS, Craig Anthony
(respondent)
EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF
QUEENSLAND
(appellant)

FILE NO/S: 

CA No 303 of 2004 DC No 148 of 2004 DC No 289 of 2004

DIVISION: 

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING: 

Sentence Appeal by A-G (Qld)

ORIGINATING 

District Court at Cairns

COURT: 

DELIVERED ON: 

3 December 2004

DELIVERED AT: 

Brisbane

HEARING DATE: 

15 November 2004

JUDGES: 

McMurdo P, McPherson JA and Philippides J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court,
each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS: 

1. Allow the appeal;

2.	Set aside the sentence imposed on 2 August 2004 for the offence of torture and in lieu thereof order that the respondent be imprisoned for 4 years;
3.	Declare that the respondent has served 218 days in pre-sentence custody which is time served pursuant to the sentence imposed by this Court;
4.	Recommend that the respondent be considered for post prison community based release after having served 18 months of the term of imprisonment.

CATCHWORDS: 

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY ATTORNEY-GENERAL OR OTHER CROWN LAW OFFICER – APPLICATIONS TO INCREASE SENTENCE – where respondent sentenced to 2 years imprisonment for torture – where respondent pleaded guilty – where mistreatment occurred over a protracted period – where respondent had recent prison sentence for breach of domestic violence order – whether sentence manifestly inadequate

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 320A

R v Burns [2000] QCA 201; CA No 399 of 1999, 30 May
2000, considered

Geddes v The Queen (1999) 106 A Crim R 14, considered considered

COUNSEL: 

D Meredith for the appellant
A J Moynihan for the respondent

SOLICITORS: 

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

1. McMURDO P: I agree with Philippides J’s reasons for allowing the appeal and increasing the sentence imposed at first instance to four years imprisonment with a recommendation for post-prison community based release after 18 months.

2. What makes the offence of torture more serious than the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm is the element of intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering. Here the injured complainant was a six year old, completely vulnerable girl child in Mr Morris’ care. Fortunately the child’s mother complained on her behalf to police so that the child was not further physically or psychologically injured. The particular of the torture charge, which involved kicking the child to the head and knocking her down and across the room so that her head struck the wall, was especially serious because of its potential to cause the child serious injury or even death. Mr Morris’ lack of insight into the wrongfulness of his actions is of concern. The sentencing principle of general and particular deterrence is apposite here. Mr Morris remains in contact with the complainant’s mother, also the mother of his own children. There is likely…