R v Young; ex parte - [2002] QCA 474

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Young; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2002] QCA 474

PARTIES:

R
v
YOUNG, Normia
(respondent)
EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF
QUEENSLAND

(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 244 of 2002
DC No 181 of 2002

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Appeal by A-G (Qld)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Cairns

DELIVERED EXTEMPORE ON:

5 November 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

5 November 2002

JUDGES:

de Jersey CJ, McMurdo P and Davies JA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

Allow the appeal and order in lieu of imprisonment of six and a half years, imprisonment in respect of counts 1, 2, 4 and 5, for ten years.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY ATTORNEY-GENERAL OR OTHER CROWN LAW OFFICER – APPLICATIONS TO INCREASE SENTENCE – OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – where Attorney-General appeals against a sentence of imprisonment of six and a half years imposed on a 48 year old man for maintaining a sexual relationship for nine months and committing rape on a 12 year old girl

CRIMINAL LAW – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – PURPOSE OF SENTENCE – RELEVANT PRINCIPLES– where respondent committed some offences while on bail, exhibited no remorse, had little insight into his conduct and needed treatment – where Court should not be unduly limited by the circumstance of Crown Prosecutor’s seriously wrong submission on sentence – where imprisonment for 10 years ordered

COUNSEL:

B G Campbell for the appellant
K M McGinness for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the appellant

Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The Honourable the Attorney-General appeals against a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon a 43 year old man for, as principally relevant, maintaining a sexual relationship and committing rape upon a 12 year old girl. For those offences he was imprisoned for six and a half years. He was dealt with at the same time for other offences but there is no need to deal with them now. His prior criminal history was not greatly relevant.

These were shocking incidents of sexual offending characterised by betrayal of trust, intimidation, violence and injury. The offending began when the respondent was acting as babysitter for the 12 year old complainant. The rapes occurred at least weekly over approximately nine months up to February 2001. The circumstances led to the complainant becoming terrified of the respondent who actively pursued and intimidated her into submission. The respondent exhibited no remorse, had little insight into his conduct and needed treatment. He committed some of the offences while on bail. The only substantial mitigating feature was that he pleaded guilty on an ex-officio indictment.

Unfortunately, before the learned sentencing Judge the Crown Prosecutor submitted for a range of five to seven years' imprisonment. That was plainly inadequate. For multiple violent…

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 Young; ex parte

Details

AGLC: R v Young; ex parte Attorney-General [2002] QCA 474
Case: [2002] QCA 474
Decision Date: 5 November 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Young, ex parte, involved an appeal by the Attorney-General against the sentence imposed on a 48-year-old man, who had been convicted of maintaining a sexual relationship for nine months and committing rape on a 12-year-old girl. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the sentence of imprisonment for six and a half years was appropriate, given the nature and severity of the crimes committed. The court was required to determine whether the original sentence adequately reflected the gravity of the offences and whether it served the purposes of sentencing, including punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

The court examined the factors to be considered in determining an appropriate sentence, including the principles of punishment and the need for rehabilitation. The respondent had committed additional offences while on bail, showed no remorse, had little insight into his conduct, and required treatment. The court noted that the Crown Prosecutor had made a seriously incorrect submission regarding the sentence, which should not unduly constrain the court's decision. The court concluded that the original sentence did not appropriately reflect the severity of the crimes and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

In light of these considerations, the court allowed the appeal and ordered that the respondent be imprisoned for ten years in respect of counts 1, 2, 4, and 5. This decision reflected the court's assessment of the appropriate sentence, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, the need for deterrence, and the respondent's need for treatment and rehabilitation.

Orders

Orders of the court

Allow the appeal and order in lieu of imprisonment of six and a half years, imprisonment in respect of counts 1, 2, 4 and 5, for ten years.

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 Young; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2002] QCA 474
PARTIES:	R v YOUNG, Normia (respondent) EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF QUEENSLAND (appellant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 244 of 2002 DC No 181 of 2002
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Appeal by A-G (Qld)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Cairns
DELIVERED EXTEMPORE ON:	5 November 2002
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	5 November 2002
JUDGES:	de Jersey CJ, McMurdo P and Davies JA Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDERS:	Allow the appeal and order in lieu of imprisonment of six and a half years, imprisonment in respect of counts 1, 2, 4 and 5, for ten years.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY ATTORNEY-GENERAL OR OTHER CROWN LAW OFFICER – APPLICATIONS TO INCREASE SENTENCE – OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – where Attorney-General appeals against a sentence of imprisonment of six and a half years imposed on a 48 year old man for maintaining a sexual relationship for nine months and committing rape on a 12 year old girl CRIMINAL LAW – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – PURPOSE OF SENTENCE – RELEVANT PRINCIPLES– where respondent committed some offences while on bail, exhibited no remorse, had little insight into his conduct and needed treatment – where Court should not be unduly limited by the circumstance of Crown Prosecutor’s seriously wrong submission on sentence – where imprisonment for 10 years ordered
COUNSEL:	B G Campbell for the appellant K M McGinness for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the appellant Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent