R v Murray

[2006] QCA 154

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	R v Murray [2006] QCA 154
PARTIES:	R v MURRAY, Larry Vincent (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 47 of 2006 SC No 493 of 2005 and 1058 of 2005
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING  COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	12 May 2006
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	19 April 2006
JUDGES:	Jerrard JA and Chesterman and Mullins JJ Separate reasons of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	Application dismissed
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 REFUSED – GENERALLY – where applicant pleaded guilty to three counts of supplying and one count of possessing MDMA – the sentencing judge imposed a head sentence of six years imprisonment, with eligibility for post-prison community based release after serving two years – whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive – where applicant entered an early plea of guilty – where two and a half year delay occurred between applicant’s arrest and sentence – where applicant voluntarily ceased trading in drugs after arrest
No. 416 of 1998, 9 April 1999, considered Jones & Harris v R (1989) 41 A Crim R 1, cited R v Crocker [1999] QCA 377; CA No. 118 of 1999, 10 September 1999, distinguished R v Dean [1999] QCA 378; CA No. 237 of 1999, 8 September 1999, considered R v Gould (unreported, Supreme Court of Queensland, Douglas J, 29 March 2005, Indictment No. 853 of 2004), considered R v Kleinschmidt [1995] QCA 541, cited R v Kunst [2002] QCA 400; CA No. 120 of 2002, 4 October 2002, distinguished R v Lau [2002] QCA 542, distinguished R v Law; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [1996] 2 Qd R 63, applied R v Patena [1996] QCA 152, considered R v Raciti [2004] QCA 359, CA No. 229 of 2004, 29 September 2004, considered R v Reid [2004] QCA 9; CA No. 271 of 2003, 16 February 2004, considered R v Rizk [2004] QCA 382; CA No. 224 of 2004, 15 October 2004, considered R v Simpson [1995] QCA 303, cited R v Van Ryan (unreported, Supreme Court of Queensland,
Bellino v R (1999) 105 A Crim R 137; [1999] QCA 106, CA considered
COUNSEL:	T D Martin SC with A J Kimmins for the applicant D R MacKenzie for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Gleeson Lawyers for the applicant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

1. JERRARD JA: In this matter I have read Chesterman J’s reasons for judgment, and agree with them and with the order His Honour proposes. I add the following further reasons which adopt the description of the relevant facts by Chesterman J.

2. The essence of the argument on appeal was that the learned sentencing judge, Mr Murray’s own counsel, and counsel for the…