R v SBJ

[2009] QCA 100

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v SBJ [2009] QCA 100

PARTIES:

R
v
SBJ
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 316 of 2008
DC No 2247 of 2008

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

24 April 2009

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

15 April 2009

JUDGES:

Muir and Fraser JJA and White J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE – where applicant convicted on plea of guilty of one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with his daughter who was under the age of 16 years, five counts of indecent treatment of his daughter during the maintaining period, one count of attempted incest and two counts of incest – where applicant sentenced on count 1 to nine years imprisonment with parole eligibility after four years – where applicant seeks for parole eligibility date to be fixed after serving three years imprisonment – whether the learned sentencing judge took into account applicant’s suffering since his confession – whether sentence manifestly excessive

CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING PROCEDURE – SINGLE SENTENCE FOR MULTIPLE OFFENCES – where applicant convicted on plea of guilty of one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with his daughter who was under the age of 16 years, five counts of indecent treatment of his daughter during the maintaining period, one count of attempted incest and two counts of incest – where applicant sentenced on count 1 to nine years imprisonment with parole eligibility after four years – where the learned sentencing judge imposed no further punishment on counts 2 to 9 and did not pronounce a conviction – whether the learned sentencing judge erred in imposing a single sentence of imprisonment for the different offences – whether applicant was properly convicted on counts 2 to 9

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 229B(7), s 229B(8), s 597C(2), s 648
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 97, s 107

R v BAY (2005) 157 A Crim R 309; [2005] QCA 427, cited
R v Beesley[2008] QCA 240, cited
R v Crofts [1999] 1 Qd R 386; [1998] QCA 60, distinguished
R v Dolan[2008] QCA 41, distinguished
R v HAP[2008] QCA 137, distinguished
R v Lowrie and Ross [2000] 2 Qd R 529; [1999] QCA 305, cited
R v Shillingsworth [1985] 1 Qd R 537, cited

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
M B Lehane for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

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

1. MUIR JA:  I agree with the reasons of White J and with the order she proposes.

1. FRASER JA:  I agree that the application should be refused for the reasons given by White J.