R v Noonan - [2001] NSWCCA 237

CITATION: R v NOONAN [2001] NSWCCA 237

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60594/00

HEARING DATE(S): 25/06/2001

JUDGMENT DATE:
25 June 2001

PARTIES :

REGINA v
Michelle Lee NOONAN

JUDGMENT OF: Barr J at 1; Howie J at 18

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 00/21/3078

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL
OFFICER : Sides QC DCJ

COUNSEL : Crown: GE Smith
Applicant: In person

SOLICITORS: Crown: SE O'Connor

DECISION: Leave to appeal granted; Appeal dismissed

60594/00

BARR J
HOWIE J

REGINA v Michelle Lee NOONAN

JUDGMENT

1 BARR J: Michelle Lee Noonan applies for leave to appeal against sentences imposed in the District Court by Sides QC DCJ. On one count of armed robbery his Honour sentenced the applicant to imprisonment for two years and six months and fixed a non-parole period of one year and three months. His Honour ordered the applicant’s release to parole at the expiry of the non-parole period, namely 22 October 2001. His Honour imposed conditions of parole.

2 On each of two counts of attempting to dispose of property his Honour sentenced the applicant to imprisonment for one month concurrent with the non-parole period on the principal offence. In the circumstances no non-parole period for those sentences was set.

3 On 1 March 2000 a woman left a train at Minto Railway Station and began walking home. As she did so, a car driven by the applicant’s companion and carrying the applicant pulled up in front of the woman. The applicant got out, went up to her and took hold of a handbag the woman was carrying. There was a struggle and then the applicant’s co-offender, who was waiting in the car, called out to the woman to give up the struggle. The woman noticed that the applicant was carrying a pair of scissors. Afraid, she let go of her handbag. The applicant took it and also a blue bag which the woman was carrying. The applicant and her companion drove away. Fortunately the victim of the attack was able to describe the car the two had used and they were arrested later on the same day. The scissors were found in the car. One of the bags was ultimately found but the other was never found.

4 The applicant made no admissions to the police. She pleaded guilty on the day the matter was fixed for trial.

5 It is unnecessary to deal with the facts of the two counts of attempting to dispose of stolen property. They were minor offences which could have been dealt with summarily. The applicant pleaded guilty to them at the first indication that the Crown made that it was prepared to accept such pleas in discharge of an indictment containing other offences as well. The sentencing judge obviously took the view that they were not of great consequence in comparison to the robbery.

6 The applicant was born on 2 September 1966 and was almost thirty four-years of age when sentenced. She began to abuse drugs when she…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Noonan

Details

AGLC: R v Noonan [2001] NSWCCA 237
Case: [2001] NSWCCA 237
Decision Date: 25 June 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Regina v Noonan, Michelle Lee Noonan applied for leave to appeal against sentences imposed by the District Court. Noonan was convicted of one count of armed robbery and two counts of attempting to dispose of property. The Court of Criminal Appeal, consisting of Barr J and Howie J, was tasked with determining whether the sentence imposed by the District Court was within the proper range of the sentencing judge's discretion. Noonan argued that the District Court had failed to consider her mental state and the influence of her partner at the time of the offence. The Crown submitted that the appeal should be dismissed as the sentence imposed was within the proper range of the sentencing judge's discretion.

The Court of Criminal Appeal held that the sentencing judge had considered all relevant factors and that Noonan had not demonstrated any error in the sentencing process. The Court noted that the sentencing judge had taken into account Noonan's past drug addiction, her efforts to overcome it, and her prospects of rehabilitation. The Court also emphasised that it was not a sentencing court but a court of error, and that Noonan had to demonstrate that the sentence imposed was outside the proper range of the sentencing judge's discretion. The Court found that the sentencing judge had not erred in his assessment of Noonan's prospects of rehabilitation, and that the sentence imposed was within the proper range of his discretion. Therefore, the Court granted leave to appeal but dismissed the appeal.

Orders