R v VHW - [2019] QChC 26

CHILDRENS COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v VHW [2019] QChC 26

PARTIES:

R

v

VHW

(Applicant)

FILE NO/S:

281/2019

DIVISION:

Childrens Court

PROCEEDING:

Sentence review

ORIGINATING COURT:

Townsville Childrens Court

DELIVERED ON:

19 September 2019 (delivered ex tempore)

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane Childrens Court

HEARING DATE:

19 September 2019

JUDGE:

Dearden DCJ

ORDER:

(1)   Application granted;

(2)   Set aside the convictions recorded in respect of the following offences:

(a)   Unlawful use of a motor vehicle (11/05/2019);

(b)   Stealing (11/05/2019);

(c)    Possess property suspected of having been used in connection with the commission of a drug offence (29/05/2019); and

(3)   Otherwise affirm the sentence imposed on 12 June 2019 in the Townsville Childrens Court.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING OF JUVENILES – application for sentence review – where the applicant was sentenced to six months’ detention with convictions recorded for three offences – where the applicant had a significant criminal history – where the applicant had demonstrated steps taken towards rehabilitation – whether the sentence was excessive in the circumstances

LEGISLATION:

Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) s 118, s 122, s 150, s 183(1), s 184

CASES:

R v BCN [2013] QCA 226
R v Cay, Gersch and Schell; ex parte Attorney-General [2005] QCA 467
R v L [2000] QCA 448
R v PBE [2019] QCA 185
R v SCU [2017] QCA 198
R v TX [2011] QCA 68

COUNSEL:

R Gill (sol) for the applicant

T Little (sol) for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the respondent

HIS HONOUR: This is a sentence review application by the applicant, VHW, in respect of sentences imposed by the learned Childrens Court Magistrate on 12 June 2019 at the Townsville Childrens Court.[1]
[1] Application for Sentence Review, filed 26 June 2019.

On that date, the applicant was sentenced for the following offences:

(1)Unlawful use of a motor vehicle (06/04/2019)
(2)Stealing (06/04/2019)
(3)Unlawful use of a motor vehicle (11/05/2019)
(4)Stealing (11/05/2019); and
(5)Possess property suspected of having been used in connection with the commission of a drug offence (29/05/2019).

The applicant was sentenced to three months detention with no convictions recorded, in respect of the offences of unlawful use of a motor vehicle, and stealing, which occurred on 6 April 2019. In respect of the remaining three offences (unlawful use of a motor vehicle on 11 May 2019, stealing on 11 May 2019 and the possess property suspected on 29 May 2019), the applicant was sentenced to six months detention, to be served at 60 per cent, but with convictions recorded.[2]
[2] Exhibit A – Affidavit of Jack Porter, affirmed 18 September 2019.

This application for review is confined only to the recording of convictions in respect of those latter three offences I’ve just identified from the sentence process on 12 June 2019.

The law – sentence reviews

The law governing sentence reviews is contained in the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) (‘YJA’) s 118. The review is a…

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 VHW

Details

AGLC: R v VHW [2019] QChC 26
Case: [2019] QChC 26
Decision Date: 19 September 2019 (delivered ex tempore)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, VHW, sought a review of the sentence imposed upon them by the Townsville Children's Court. VHW had been sentenced to six months’ detention with convictions recorded for three separate offences. The applicant had a significant history of criminal behaviour but had taken steps towards rehabilitation. The central issue was whether the sentence was excessive given the circumstances.

The court examined the appropriate principles of sentencing for juveniles, particularly focusing on the need for rehabilitation and proportionality. The court considered the gravity of the offences, VHW's criminal history, and the steps taken towards rehabilitation. It was noted that the sentence imposed was relatively short, considering the nature of the offences and the applicant's past behaviour. The court determined that while the offences were serious, the sentence was proportionate and not excessive, taking into account the applicant's demonstrated efforts towards rehabilitation.

Following its analysis, the court granted the application for sentence review, setting aside the convictions for the offences of unlawful use of a motor vehicle, stealing, and possessing property suspected of having been used in connection with the commission of a drug offence. The sentence of six months’ detention was otherwise affirmed. The court’s decision balanced the need to hold the applicant accountable for their actions with the imperative to support their rehabilitation.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Application granted;

(2) Set aside the convictions recorded in respect of the following offences:

(a) Unlawful use of a motor vehicle (11/05/2019);

(b) Stealing (11/05/2019);

(3) Otherwise affirm the sentence imposed on 12 June 2019 in the Townsville Childrens Court.

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 VHW [2019] QChC 26
PARTIES:	R v VHW (Applicant)
FILE NO/S:	281/2019
DIVISION:	Childrens Court
PROCEEDING:	Sentence review
ORIGINATING COURT:	Townsville Childrens Court
DELIVERED ON:	19 September 2019 (delivered ex tempore)
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane Childrens Court
HEARING DATE:	19 September 2019
JUDGE:	Dearden DCJ
ORDER:	(1) Application granted; (2) Set aside the convictions recorded in respect of the following offences: (a) Unlawful use of a motor vehicle (11/05/2019); (b) Stealing (11/05/2019); (c) Possess property suspected of having been used in connection with the commission of a drug offence (29/05/2019); and (3) Otherwise affirm the sentence imposed on 12 June 2019 in the Townsville Childrens Court.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING OF JUVENILES – application for sentence review – where the applicant was sentenced to six months’ detention with convictions recorded for three offences – where the applicant had a significant criminal history – where the applicant had demonstrated steps taken towards rehabilitation – whether the sentence was excessive in the circumstances
LEGISLATION:	Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) s 118, s 122, s 150, s 183(1), s 184
CASES:	R v BCN [2013] QCA 226 R v Cay, Gersch and Schell; ex parte Attorney-General [2005] QCA 467 R v L [2000] QCA 448 R v PBE [2019] QCA 185 R v SCU [2017] QCA 198 R v TX [2011] QCA 68
COUNSEL:	R Gill (sol) for the applicant T Little (sol) for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the respondent