R v SDM

In the case of R v SDM, the applicant, SDM, appeals against the sentence imposed for count 3 of the indictment, which involved aggravated rape, in the Supreme Court of Queensland. SDM was convicted of three counts of rape, all of which occurred on one occasion after the complainant had ended their domestic relationship. The applicant pleaded guilty and was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment for count 3, which involved repeated “fisting” and was the most serious of the offences. The sentencing judge also declared that the applicant was convicted of a serious violent offence in respect of count 3. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against the sentence on the ground that it is manifestly excessive.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence imposed for count 3 was manifestly excessive and whether the sentence imposed was inadequately reduced for the applicant’s plea of guilty and other mitigating factors. The court considered the principles of sentencing and the relevant legislation, as well as the circumstances of the case and the impact of the offending on the complainant. The court noted that the sentencing judge had taken into account the applicant’s guilty plea and other mitigating factors, but had also considered the gravity of the offending and the need to deter and protect the community. The court found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive and that the sentencing judge had adequately considered the mitigating factors.

The court held that the applicant’s appeal against sentence should be allowed. The court found that the sentence imposed for count 3 was manifestly excessive and that the making of an SVO declaration did not render the sentence excessive. The court noted that the sentencing judge had not adequately reduced the sentence for the applicant’s guilty plea and other mitigating factors, as intended by the judge. The court also found that the making of an SVO declaration did not increase the severity of the sentence, but rather reflected the gravity of the offending. The court concluded that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and that leave to appeal should be granted.

The orders of the court were that leave to appeal against sentence was granted, that the applicant give any notice of abandonment of appeal to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal within 14 days of the publication of these reasons and that if no such notice is received within the time specified in the preceding order, the appeal is adjourned to be disposed of on the papers. The court directed that the applicant give any notice of abandonment of appeal to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal within 14 days of the publication of these reasons. If no such notice is received within the time specified in the preceding order, the appeal is adjourned to be disposed of on the papers in accordance with [50] of these reasons.