R v. Robinson - [2008] QCA 365

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Robinson [2008] QCA 365

PARTIES:

R
v
ROBINSON, Shane Matthew
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 189 of 2008
SC No 43 of 2008

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

21 November 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

24 October 2008

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Fraser JA and McMeekin J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

Application dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – application for leave to appeal against sentence – convictions for offences under the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) – whether the sentence imposed was excessive

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 688D
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 13(3), s 161

R v Daly (2004) 147 A Crim R 440; [2004] QCA 385, considered
R v Drury[2005] QCA 187, considered
R v King, unreported, Supreme Court, Qld, SC No 16 of 2008, 15 July 2008, considered
R v Kunst [2003] 2 Qd R 98; [2002] QCA 400, considered

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
G Cummings for the Respondent

SOLICITORS:

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

McMURDO P: The application for leave to appeal against sentence should be refused for the reasons given by McMeekin J.

FRASER JA: I agree with the order proposed by McMeekin J and with his Honour’s reasons for the order.

McMEEKIN J: This is an application pursuant to s 668D of the Criminal Code for leave to appeal against sentence passed on 21 June 2008.

The applicant, Shane Matthew Robinson, pleaded guilty at the Supreme Court in Cairns to 16 offences against the provisions of the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) and was sentenced to imprisonment as follows:

(a) two counts of supplying methylamphetamine to another (count 9 - 3 years and count 10 - 4 years);

(b) four counts of possession of methylamphetamine (counts 1, 6, 11, and 14 – 2 years);

(c) one count of possessing amphetamine (count 4 – 2 years);

(d) one count of possessing 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (count 3 – 1 year);

(e) three counts of possession of cannabis sativa (counts 2, 5 and 7 - 1 year);

(f) three counts of possessing things for use in connection with the commission of the crime of supplying dangerous drugs (counts 8, 13 and 15 – 1 year); and

(g) two counts of possession of property knowingly obtained from supplying a dangerous drug (counts 12 and 16 – 1 year).

In relation to count 10 (the second count of supplying methylamphetamine to another) the applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for four years with a parole eligibility date set for 21 December 2008, that is after serving one year and 70 days, bringing into account 255 days of pre-sentence custody. Effectively his Honour…

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. Robinson

Details

AGLC: R v Robinson [2008] QCA 365
Case: [2008] QCA 365
Decision Date: 21 November 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v. Robinson, the appellant challenged the sentence imposed by the lower court, arguing it was excessive. Robinson was convicted for offences under the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) and was sentenced to a period of imprisonment. The appellant applied for leave to appeal against the sentence, contending that it was manifestly excessive. The appeal raised issues concerning the proportionality and appropriateness of the sentence in relation to the crimes committed.

The court examined the principles guiding sentencing, focusing on whether the sentence was manifestly excessive or inadequate. This involved a review of the nature and gravity of the offences, the personal circumstances of the offender, and the sentencing practices in similar cases. The court considered the appellant's criminal history and the statutory guidelines applicable to drug-related offences. It assessed whether the sentence imposed by the lower court departed to an extent that warranted appellate intervention.

After thorough consideration, the court found that the sentence was within the range of appropriate penalties for the offences committed. The decision acknowledged the seriousness of the drug-related crimes but concluded that the sentence did not exceed the bounds of what was reasonable and just. The court held that there were no grounds for interference, and the appeal was dismissed. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal against the sentence was denied, and the original sentence was upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application dismissed

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.

CITATION:	R v Robinson [2008] QCA 365
PARTIES:	R v ROBINSON, Shane Matthew (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 189 of 2008 SC No 43 of 2008
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Cairns
DELIVERED ON:	21 November 2008
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	24 October 2008
JUDGES:	McMurdo P, Fraser JA and McMeekin J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	Application dismissed
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – application for leave to appeal against sentence – convictions for offences under the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) – whether the sentence imposed was excessive Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 688D Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 13(3), s 161 R v Daly (2004) 147 A Crim R 440; [2004] QCA 385, considered R v Drury[2005] QCA 187, considered R v King, unreported, Supreme Court, Qld, SC No 16 of 2008, 15 July 2008, considered R v Kunst [2003] 2 Qd R 98; [2002] QCA 400, considered
COUNSEL:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf G Cummings for the Respondent
SOLICITORS:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent