Rolls v Queensland Police Service

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Rolls v Queensland Police Service [2021] QDC 339

PARTIES:

TAVIS LYNDON ROLLS

(Appellant)

v

QUEENSLAND POLICE SERVICE

(Respondent)

FILE NO:

103 of 2021

DIVISION:

Criminal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Magistrates Court at Southport

DELIVERED ON:

19 November 2021 (ex tempore)

DELIVERED AT:

Southport

HEARING DATE:

19 November 2021

JUDGE:

Jackson QC DCJ

ORDER:

The appeal is allowed.

The orders of the Magistrates Court at Southport made on 11 March 2021 are varied:

1.     by deletion of the order that a conviction be recorded and in lieu thereof it is ordered that no conviction is recorded; and

2.  by substituting an order that the appellant perform 100 hours of community service less the hours already performed.

CATCHWORDS:

COUNSEL:

SOLICITORS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE – Where the appellant was sentenced to 240 hours of community service, ordered to pay $2,000 compensation and a conviction was recorded – where the appellant submits that the recording of a conviction and the imposition of the maximum number of community service hours rendered the sentence manifestly excessive – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive in the circumstances.

Justices Act 1886
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992

Majeed v The Queen [2013] VSCA 40
R v Cunningham [2005] QCA 321
R v Dang [2018] QCA 331
R v El Hassan [2003] NSWCCA 139
R v Seiler [2003] QCA 217
R v T [1998] QCA 456
R v Bradley [2020] QCA 76

E Engwirda for the Appellant
R Godfrey for the Respondent

Donnelly Law Group for the Appellant

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the Respondent.

1. The appellant was convicted on his own plea of one count of assault occasioning bodily harm in company on 8 August 2020.  He was sentenced to two years’ probation and 240 hours community service and ordered to pay $2,000 in compensation.  A conviction was recorded.

   Grounds of appeal

2. The sole ground of appeal is that the sentence imposed was, in all of the circumstances, manifestly excessive.

3. By his written submissions dated 8 June 2021, the appellant identifies the following reasons it is submitted the appeal should be allowed together with or leading to manifest excess:

   (a)The learned sentencing Magistrate erred in the exercise of the discretion conferred by s 12(1) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (“the Act”) to record a conviction;

   (b)This is not a case where the nature of the offence of itself warranted the recording of a conviction;

   (c)The learned sentencing Magistrate mis-stated the agreed facts in the sentencing remarks;

   (d)The learned Magistrate imposed the maximum number of community service hours without the appellant’s consent and when such order was not appropriate in the circumstances.

4. In a supplementary outline a further argument as to parity is raised.

   Nature of the appeal

5. To succeed on an appeal such as this pursuant to section 222 of the Justices Act, an appellant must demonstrate that the order the subject of the appeal is…