R v Thompson

[1992] QCA 199

COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 199

MACROSSAN CJ
DAVIES JA

DERRINGTON J

CA No 50 of 1992

THE QUEEN

v

RICKY LEE THOMPSON

Appellant

BRISBANE

..DATE 13/5/92

ORDER

1

ORDER

MACROSSAN CJ: This is an application for leave to appeal

against sentence by the applicant who as an 18 year old first
offender pleaded guilty to two charges, one of breaking,
entering and stealing at a seafood restaurant premises at the

Gold Coast, and a second one of unlawfully using a motor

vehicle without the consent of the owner. The first offence
occurred on 6 February 1992 and the second offence on 15

November 1991. Both offences, in fact, occurred at the Gold

Coast. The sentence imposed was a custodial term, two months

imprisonment in each case, the sentences to be served

concurrently. The facts emphasised on behalf of the applicant
are his youth and the fact that he was a first offender. In

the entry of the seafood restaurant, the items stolen were a

quantity of small goods, lollies, icecreams and frozen foods;

in the second case, the complainant had parked a vehicle

outside a night club at Tallebudgera. It was taken while she
was inside, as indeed she discovered when she later went to
where the vehicle had been parked. It was, however,
discovered next morning at Palm Beach in good condition. The

applicant has already spent two weeks in custody attributable to the present charges. Apart from that he has been on bail.

There is no doubt that the offences were serious ones and the

penalty imposed needs to take that into account, but that

aspect, in my opinion, is outweighed by the considerations

that the applicant was only 18 years of age and had never

2

previously offended.

In these circumstances, it is appropriate in recognition of

those facts and in accordance with the principles stated on

occasions previously by this Court to interfere. A sentence
other than of a non-custodial nature must be regarded as
excessive, and counsel appearing for the Crown does not
contend otherwise. I would accordingly allow the application
and the appeal against sentence, and in each case order that

the applicant be placed on probation on standard terms for six

months and that he perform 50 hours of community service in

total.

The order for probation would be for the period of six months

and the same period, of course, will apply in respect of each
of the offences. The total of 50 hours community service will

be imposed upon the offence of breaking, entering and

stealing. We are informed that the applicant is prepared to
consent to orders of the kind I have specified and that he
understands their nature. That is correct?

MR RAFTER: Yes.

MACROSSAN CJ: And it appears that he is fully aware of the

consequence of the Court so ordering. In those circumstances,

it is appropriate to make the orders that I have indicated

without further delay or formalities.

DAVIES JA: I agree.

DERRINGTON J: I agree.

MACROSSAN CJ: They will be the orders of the Court.

3