R v Patrick (a pseudonym); R v Patrick (a pseudonym); Ex parte

Case [2020] QCA 51

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Patrick (a pseudonym); R v Patrick (a pseudonym); Ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [2020] QCA 51

PARTIES:

In CA No 227 of 2019:

R
v
PATRICK (a pseudonym)
(applicant)

In CA No 230 of 2019:

R
v
PATRICK (a pseudonym)
(respondent)
EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 227 of 2019
CA No 230 of 2019
DC No 42 of 2019
DC No 45 of 2019

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application
Sentence Appeal by Attorney-General (Qld)

ORIGINATING COURT:

Childrens Court at Ipswich – Date of Sentence: 9 August 2019 (Lynch QC DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

24 March 2020

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

28 November 2019

JUDGES:

Sofronoff P and Fraser JA and Boddice J

ORDERS:

1.   The application for leave to appeal is refused.

2.   The appeal by the Attorney-General is allowed.

3.   Sentence for count 2 on indictment CCJ-00003169/19(7) be set aside.

4.   In lieu thereof, the offender be detained for a period of five years and that he be released after serving 50 per cent of the period of detention.

5.   A conviction be recorded.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – where a child offender pleaded guilty on the first indictment to burglary and robbery – where a child offender pleaded guilty on the second indictment to unlawful use of a motor vehicle and malicious act with intent, namely doing grievous bodily harm with intent to prevent their lawful arrest – where the child committed the offences of the second indictment while on bail for the first indictment – where the child was driving a stolen vehicle – where the child caused grievous bodily harm to a police officer by swerving to avoid a tyre deflation device installed to intercept the stolen vehicle – where the child was sentenced for the malicious act with intent to three years’ detention with a conviction recorded, with lesser concurrent sentences for the other three counts with no conviction recorded for the lesser counts – where the learned sentencing judge identified the child offender’s early plea of guilty, remorse, lack of criminal history, efforts at rehabilitation in detention, exposure to domestic violence and drug use, and youth as factors in mitigation – whether the learned sentencing judge erred in recording the conviction for the malicious act with intent – whether the learned sentencing judge erred in not affording appropriate weight to the fact that the grievous bodily harm was done to a police officer and the permanence and severity of the harm inflicted upon the officer as factors in aggravation – whether the sentence of detention was manifestly inadequate – whether the sentence regarding the conviction was manifestly excessive

Criminal Code (Qld), s 317
Criminal Law (Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act 1986 (Qld), s 3, s 6
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 4
Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld), s 2, s 3, s…

Continue reading R v Patrick (a pseudonym); R v Patrick (a pseudonym); Ex par...

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Patrick (a pseudonym); R v Patrick (a pseudonym); Ex parte [2020] QCA 51
Case
[2020] QCA 51
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an appeal against sentence and an application for leave to appeal by a child offender who had pleaded guilty to multiple criminal offences. The offender was initially charged with burglary and robbery, to which they pleaded guilty on the first indictment. Subsequently, the offender pleaded guilty to unlawful use of a motor vehicle and a malicious act with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, committed while on bail for the earlier charges. The offender caused grievous bodily harm to a police officer by swerving to avoid a tyre deflation device during the commission of the second set of offences.

The legal issues before the court included whether the sentencing judge had erred in recording a conviction for the malicious act with intent, whether the judge appropriately weighed the severity of the harm caused to a police officer as an aggravating factor, and whether the overall sentence was manifestly inadequate or excessive. The offender argued that the sentence was too lenient, while the Attorney-General contended that the sentence was manifestly inadequate and sought a harsher penalty.

The court found that the sentencing judge had erred in recording a conviction for the malicious act with intent, as the concurrent sentencing for the other counts effectively nullified the need for a separate conviction. The court also determined that the judge did not give sufficient weight to the fact that the grievous bodily harm was inflicted on a police officer, nor to the permanence and severity of the harm caused. Consequently, the appeal by the Attorney-General was allowed, and the sentence for the malicious act with intent was set aside. In its place, the offender was to be detained for five years, with a conviction recorded, and released after serving 50 per cent of the sentence. The application for leave to appeal was refused.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application for leave to appeal is refused.

2. The appeal by the Attorney-General is allowed.

3. Sentence for count 2 on indictment CCJ-00003169/19(7) be set aside.

4. In lieu thereof, the offender be detained for a period of five years and that he be released after serving 50 per cent of the period of detention.

5. A conviction be recorded.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.