R v Quinn

99.500

COURT OF APPEAL
de JERSEY CJ
McMURDO P

THOMAS JA

CA No 302 of 1999
THE QUEEN
v.

STEVEN RAYMOND QUINN

Applicant

BRISBANE
..DATE 01/12/99
011299 T17/FLC4 M/T COA295/99
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The applicant a 25-year-old man with a
substantial relevant criminal history was sentenced on his
plea of guilty to four years imprisonment for attempted
armed robbery in company and additionally for breaking and
entering a dwelling with intent and stealing. He committed
the offences on 5 February 1999. He seeks leave to appeal.

He broke into a house and stole an air rifle, he shortened it, then he with another man entered the house of a 75 year old woman and terrorised her with the weapon. He had hoped to steal rent money.

The complainant was in considerable fear. Especially in view of his extensive record and notwithstanding his disadvantaged background and pleas of guilty he was in my view appropriately sentenced to four years imprisonment for what was a serious offence. When he was sentenced the applicant was serving terms of imprisonment imposed in March and April 1999. On this occasion he was sentenced on 30 July 1999. As pointed out by counsel for the respondent the applicant has overall been sentenced effectively, for a number of offences committed in January and February 1999, to four years and five months, those offences being one of armed robbery in company, four of housebreaking, five of stealing and one of the unlawful possession of a motor vehicle. On any reasonable view he has been treated reasonably.

The learned Judge failed however to make a recommendation with respect to parole, which was necessary. The applicant 011299 T17/FLC4 M/T COA295/99

should therefore be allowed to the extent of setting a new
parole date. The correct parole date we are informed is
20 April 2001. I would allow the application and the appeal
to be extended confirming the sentences imposed in the
District Court but adding a recommendation that the
applicant first be considered eligible for parole as at 20

April 2001.

THE PRESIDENT: I agree.

THOMAS JA: I agree.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: And that is the order.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Court of Appeal, the matter of R v Quinn was heard, involving Steven Raymond Quinn, who appealed his sentence. Quinn, with a substantial criminal history, was sentenced to four years imprisonment for attempted armed robbery in company and for breaking and entering a dwelling with intent and stealing. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining whether Quinn's sentence was appropriate given the nature of his crimes and his criminal history.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed on Quinn was proportionate and appropriate given the severity of the crimes committed. The court also needed to determine if the learned judge had appropriately considered Quinn's background and made a necessary recommendation regarding parole eligibility. The court examined the totality of Quinn's sentences, including those imposed for other offences committed around the same time.

The Court of Appeal held that the sentence was appropriate considering the seriousness of the offences and Quinn's extensive criminal history. However, the learned judge had failed to make a recommendation regarding parole eligibility. The court found that Quinn should be eligible for parole from 20 April 2001. The appeal was allowed to the extent of setting a new parole date. The Court of Appeal confirmed the sentences imposed but recommended Quinn be considered eligible for parole as of 20 April 2001.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established