R v Wilde; ex parte A-G (Qld) - [2002] QCA 501

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Wilde; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2002] QCA 501

PARTIES:

R
v
WILDE, Sandra Jaye
(respondent)
EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 283 of 2002
DC No 2062 of 2002
DC No 2104 of 2002
DC No 2171 of 2002

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Appeal by A-G (Qld)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

19 November 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

15 November 2002

JUDGES:

de Jersey CJ, Jerrard JA and Mullins J
Judgment of the Court

ORDERS:

1. That the sentences imposed in the District Court on 13 August 2002 be varied, by substituting, for the term of two years four months imprisonment imposed for count one on indictment 2171/02, imprisonment for five years; and by varying the recommendation for consideration of eligibility for post-prison community based release, to provide for eligibility after the serving of three years imprisonment in lieu of 18 months imprisonment, that is, on 13 August 2005 (three years from the date of sentencing in the District Court).

2. In all other respects the orders made in the District Court on 13 August 2002 remain unchanged.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – DRIVING OFFENCES – CULPABLE OR DANGEROUS DRIVING CAUSING DEATH OR BODILY HARM – GENERALLY – where Attorney-General appeals against sentence – where dangerous operation of a vehicle caused death – where sentences cumulative upon term for unrelated previous offending – whether manifest inadequacy in the sentence imposed – consideration of significance to sentence of flight from scene – whether rendering sentence cumulative warranted substantial reduction of sentence otherwise to be imposed

Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9

R v Conquest; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1995] QCA 567; CA No 395 of 1995, 19 December 1995, considered
R v Kiripatea [1991] 2 Qd R 686, applied
R v McAnelly; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] QCA 126; CA No 375 of 1995, 10 May 1996, considered
R v Melano; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1995] 2 Qd R 186, applied
R v Richards [1981] 2 NSWLR 464, followed

COUNSEL:

C W Heaton for the appellant
R V Hanson QC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the appellant
Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent

THE COURT: The Honourable the Attorney-General appeals against an effective three year ten months term of imprisonment imposed on the respondent for various offences. The ground is that the penalty is manifestly inadequate.

The respondent pleaded guilty in the District Court to a series of charges contained in three indictments.

The first indictment contained charges of aggravated unlawful use of a motor vehicle, receiving, and burglary and stealing. The respondent was found on 20 June 2001 in a vehicle unlawfully taken from a shopping centre car park on 19 June 2001. The vehicle contained property stolen previously from premises burgled earlier on 20 June 2001 and at which that stolen car had been seen. For burglary and stealing,…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Wilde; ex parte A-G (Qld) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2002] QCA 501
Decision Date: 19 November 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Wilde; ex parte A-G (Qld), the Attorney-General appealed against the sentence imposed by the District Court on the respondent, who had been found guilty of dangerous operation of a vehicle causing death. The respondent had driven a vehicle in a manner that was dangerous to the public, resulting in the death of a pedestrian. The court had imposed a sentence of two years and four months imprisonment for this offence, to be served concurrently with a sentence of three years for an unrelated previous offence.

The key legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed by the District Court was manifestly inadequate, and whether the court should impose a more severe sentence. The court considered the significance of the respondent's flight from the scene of the accident, and whether this warranted a substantial reduction of the sentence. The court also considered the need to maintain public confidence in the criminal justice system, and the need to impose a sentence that was commensurate with the gravity of the offence.

The court held that the sentence imposed by the District Court was manifestly inadequate, and varied the sentence to impose a term of imprisonment of five years. The court held that the respondent's flight from the scene of the accident was a significant aggravating factor, and that this warranted a substantial increase in the sentence. The court also held that the sentence should be cumulative with the sentence for the unrelated previous offence, to ensure that the respondent was punished for all of his criminal conduct.

The court made orders varying the sentence imposed by the District Court, and imposing a term of imprisonment of five years. The court also varied the recommendation for consideration of eligibility for post-prison community based release, to provide for eligibility after the serving of three years imprisonment in lieu of 18 months imprisonment. In all other respects, the orders made in the District Court on 13 August 2002 remained unchanged.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. That the sentences imposed in the District Court on 13 August 2002 be varied, by substituting, for the term of two years four months imprisonment imposed for count one on indictment 2171/02, imprisonment for five years; and by varying the recommendation for consideration of eligibility for post-prison community based release, to provide for eligibility after the serving of three years imprisonment in lieu of 18 months imprisonment, that is, on 13 August 2005 (three years from the date of sentencing in the District Court).

2. In all other respects the orders made in the District Court on 13 August 2002 remain unchanged.

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 Wilde; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2002] QCA 501
PARTIES:	R v WILDE, Sandra Jaye (respondent) EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND (appellant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 283 of 2002 DC No 2062 of 2002 DC No 2104 of 2002 DC No 2171 of 2002
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Appeal by A-G (Qld)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	19 November 2002
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	15 November 2002
JUDGES:	de Jersey CJ, Jerrard JA and Mullins J Judgment of the Court
ORDERS:	1. That the sentences imposed in the District Court on 13 August 2002 be varied, by substituting, for the term of two years four months imprisonment imposed for count one on indictment 2171/02, imprisonment for five years; and by varying the recommendation for consideration of eligibility for post-prison community based release, to provide for eligibility after the serving of three years imprisonment in lieu of 18 months imprisonment, that is, on 13 August 2005 (three years from the date of sentencing in the District Court). 2. In all other respects the orders made in the District Court on 13 August 2002 remain unchanged.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – DRIVING OFFENCES – CULPABLE OR DANGEROUS DRIVING CAUSING DEATH OR BODILY HARM – GENERALLY – where Attorney-General appeals against sentence – where dangerous operation of a vehicle caused death – where sentences cumulative upon term for unrelated previous offending – whether manifest inadequacy in the sentence imposed – consideration of significance to sentence of flight from scene – whether rendering sentence cumulative warranted substantial reduction of sentence otherwise to be imposed Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9 R v Conquest; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1995] QCA 567; CA No 395 of 1995, 19 December 1995, considered R v Kiripatea [1991] 2 Qd R 686, applied R v McAnelly; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] QCA 126; CA No 375 of 1995, 10 May 1996, considered R v Melano; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1995] 2 Qd R 186, applied R v Richards [1981] 2 NSWLR 464, followed
COUNSEL:	C W Heaton for the appellant R V Hanson QC for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the appellant Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent