R v Porter

Case [2002] QCA 59


SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Porter [2002] QCA 59

PARTIES:

R
v
PORTER, Christopher Grahame
(applicant/appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 261 of 2001
DC No 2261 of 2001

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application against conviction and sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

8 March 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

26 February 2002

JUDGES:

McPherson and Williams JJA and Byrne J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made.

ORDER:

1.  Appeal against conviction dismissed.

2. Application and appeal allowed to the extent of varying the recommendation to one of eligibility to apply for post prison community based release after the applicant has served 12 months of his cumulative sentence.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – OTHER OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – ASSAULTS – SENTENCING – where the appellant convicted of assault occasioning bodily harm - where appellant received sentence of 2 years imprisonment cumulative upon a 7 ½ month sentence already being served with a recommendation that he be eligible for post prison community based release after serving 15 ¾ months of the total sentence – where learned sentencing judged erred in findings of fact in relation to issues of mitigation – where use of emotive language during sentencing remarks – where recommendation for post prison community based release amended to 12 months.

COUNSEL:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf.
B G Campbell for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf.
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

  1. MCPHERSON JA:  I have read and I agree with the reasons of Williams JA.  I agree with the orders he proposes for disposing of the appeal and the application.

  1. WILLIAMS JA:  The appellant, who appeared on his own behalf, was convicted on his own plea of:

(i)burglary – being in a dwelling house in the night with intent to commit an indictable offence in the dwelling;

(ii)assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed with an offensive instrument namely a metal bar.

He was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment cumulative upon a 7 ½ month sentence already being served, and a recommendation was made that he be eligible to apply for post prison community based release after serving 15 ¾ months of the total sentence.  

  1. The charges arose out of incidents which occurred on 10 March 2000.  Consequent upon the events which occurred that night the appellant was charged with the above offences and also:

(a)with an additional circumstance of aggravation to the assault charge that he was in company with other persons;

(b)armed robbery in company.

  1. When called upon on 28 August 2001 he pleaded not guilty to the charges (a) and (b).  After a short adjournment the prosecution accepted the pleas of guilty noted above in full discharge of the indictment.

  1. It appears that earlier attempts to have the indictment dealt with by the court had resulted in adjournments because of confusion as to…

Continue reading R v Porter

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Porter [2002] QCA 59
Case
[2002] QCA 59
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant in this matter was convicted of an assault occasioning bodily harm and was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment, to be served cumulatively with a 7 ½ month sentence already being served. The sentencing judge recommended that the appellant be eligible for post prison community based release after serving 15 ¾ months of the total sentence. The appellant appealed the sentence, arguing that the sentencing judge had erred in their findings of fact in relation to issues of mitigation and that they had used emotive language during the sentencing remarks. The court was required to determine whether the appeal against conviction and sentence should be dismissed or whether the recommendation for post prison community based release should be amended.

The court found that the appeal against conviction should be dismissed as there was no error in the conviction. However, the court did find that the sentencing judge had erred in their findings of fact and that the emotive language used during the sentencing remarks was inappropriate. The court held that the recommendation for post prison community based release should be amended to 12 months, rather than 15 ¾ months. The court held that the appellant should be eligible to apply for post prison community based release after serving 12 months of his cumulative sentence.

The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the application and appeal were allowed to the extent of varying the recommendation to one of eligibility to apply for post prison community based release after the appellant has served 12 months of his cumulative sentence. This means that the appellant will be eligible to apply for release after serving 12 months, rather than 15 ¾ months, of his sentence. The court's decision highlights the importance of accurate findings of fact and appropriate language during sentencing remarks.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Appeal against conviction dismissed.

2. Application and appeal allowed to the extent of varying the recommendation to one of eligibility to apply for post prison community based release after the applicant has served 12 months of his cumulative sentence.

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.