R v Steedman - [2011] QCA 246

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Steedman [2011] QCA 246

PARTIES:

R
v
STEEDMAN, Michael Brian
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 211 of 2011
DC No 308 of 2011

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Extension (Sentence)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

21 September 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

21 September 2011

JUDGES:

Margaret McMurdo P and Muir and White JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

Orders delivered ex tempore on 21 September 2011:

1. Time is extended to apply for leave to appeal against sentence to 20 July 2011.

2. The application for leave to appeal against sentence is granted.

3. The appeal is allowed to the limited extent of setting aside the sentences on each count suspending the sentence after 12 months and substituting a suspension of six months.

4. The sentence imposed at first instance is otherwise confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL –PROCEDURE – NOTICES OF APPEAL – TIME FOR APPEAL AND EXTENSION THEREOF – where the application for leave to appeal against sentence was filed about one month out of time – whether the application for an extension of time should be granted

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – PARITY BETWEEN CO-OFFENDERS – where the applicant was sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment suspended after 12 months with an operational period of four years – where the applicant argued he had a less serious role in the offending than his two co-accused – where the applicant contended he had a less significant criminal history than his two co-accused – whether the applicant has a justifiable sense of grievance in light of the sentence imposed on his co-accused – whether applicant's sentence accords with the need for parity of sentencing between co-offenders

R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88; [2007] QCA 247, considered

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 (Queensland) for the respondent

THE PRESIDENT: The applicant, Michael Brian Steedman, pleaded guilty on 20 May 2011 to six counts of burglary and stealing and one count of burglary by breaking. All offences were committed between August and October 2008. On each count he was sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment with an order that those terms of imprisonment be suspended after 12 months with an operational period of four years. He did not file an application for leave to appeal against his sentence within time. Only on 19 July 2011 did he apply for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against his sentence, about one month late.

In his application he states as his reasons for not filing it within time: "Circumstances out of my control due to misleading legal advice.…

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 Steedman

Details

AGLC: R v Steedman [2011] QCA 246
Case: [2011] QCA 246
Decision Date: 21 September 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Steedman involved an appeal against sentence by the applicant, who was one of three co-offenders involved in a criminal matter. The primary legal issue was whether the application for leave to appeal against sentence, which was filed approximately one month out of time, should be granted. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether the applicant had a justifiable sense of grievance in light of the sentences imposed on his co-accused and whether his sentence accords with the need for parity of sentencing between co-offenders.

The applicant argued that he had a less serious role in the offending than his two co-accused and that he had a less significant criminal history. The court considered these arguments and assessed whether the applicant's sentence was disproportionate to the roles and criminal histories of his co-offenders. The court also examined whether the applicant had a justifiable sense of grievance in light of the sentences imposed on his co-accused and whether the need for parity of sentencing between co-offenders was met.

The court found that the application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against sentence should be granted. The application for leave to appeal against sentence was also granted. The appeal was allowed to the limited extent of setting aside the sentences on each count suspending the sentence after 12 months and substituting a suspension of six months. The sentence imposed at first instance was otherwise confirmed.

The final orders included extending the time to apply for leave to appeal against sentence, granting the application for leave to appeal against sentence, allowing the appeal to the limited extent of substituting a suspension of six months, and confirming the sentence imposed at first instance in all other respects.

Orders

Orders of the court

Orders delivered ex tempore on 21 September 2011:

1. Time is extended to apply for leave to appeal against sentence to 20 July 2011.

2. The application for leave to appeal against sentence is granted.

3. The appeal is allowed to the limited extent of setting aside the sentences on each count suspending the sentence after 12 months and substituting a suspension of six months.

4. The sentence imposed at first instance is otherwise confirmed.

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 Steedman [2011] QCA 246
PARTIES:	R v STEEDMAN, Michael Brian (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 211 of 2011 DC No 308 of 2011
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Extension (Sentence)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	21 September 2011
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	21 September 2011
JUDGES:	Margaret McMurdo P and Muir and White JJA Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDERS:	Orders delivered ex tempore on 21 September 2011: 1. Time is extended to apply for leave to appeal against sentence to 20 July 2011. 2. The application for leave to appeal against sentence is granted. 3. The appeal is allowed to the limited extent of setting aside the sentences on each count suspending the sentence after 12 months and substituting a suspension of six months. 4. The sentence imposed at first instance is otherwise confirmed.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL –PROCEDURE – NOTICES OF APPEAL – TIME FOR APPEAL AND EXTENSION THEREOF – where the application for leave to appeal against sentence was filed about one month out of time – whether the application for an extension of time should be granted CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – PARITY BETWEEN CO-OFFENDERS – where the applicant was sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment suspended after 12 months with an operational period of four years – where the applicant argued he had a less serious role in the offending than his two co-accused – where the applicant contended he had a less significant criminal history than his two co-accused – whether the applicant has a justifiable sense of grievance in light of the sentence imposed on his co-accused – whether applicant's sentence accords with the need for parity of sentencing between co-offenders R v Bryant (2007) 173 A Crim R 88; [2007] QCA 247, considered
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 (Queensland) for the respondent