Sage v The Queen - [2007] NSWCCA 224

New South Wales
Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: SAGE v R [2007] NSWCCA 224

HEARING DATE(S): 13 July 2007

JUDGMENT DATE:
27 July 2007

JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA at 1; Latham J at 2; Mathews AJ at 17

DECISION: 1. Leave to appeal granted; 2. Appeal dismissed

CATCHWORDS: Sentence appeal - pleas of guilty to sexual offences committed against children whilst outside Australia - ss 50BA(1) and 50BC(1)(a) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) - whether undue emphasis upon specific deterrence - sentence not manifestly excessive.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1914

PARTIES: Applicant - Peter SAGE
Respondent - REGINA

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/952

COUNSEL: Applicant- W Flynn
Respondent - C Ng

SOLICITORS: Applicant - Marsdens Law Group
Respondent - Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 05/11/1108

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: McLoughlin DCJ

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 24 March 2006

2007/952

GILES JA
LATHAM J
MATHEWS AJ
27 JULY 2007

PETER SAGE v REGINA

Judgment

1 GILES JA : I agree with Latham J.

2 LATHAM J : The Applicant seeks leave to appeal against sentences imposed by McLoughlin DCJ on 24 March 2006 following the applicant’s pleas of guilty to 5 counts of Sexual Intercourse with a Person Under 16 Whilst Outside Australia (s 50BA(1) Crimes Act 1914) and 2 counts of Committing an Act of Indecency on a Person Under 16 Whilst Outside Australia (s 50BC(1)(a) Crimes Act 1914). A further 5 charges under s 50BC(1)(a) were taken into account pursuant to s 16BA of the Crimes Act 1914.

3 The offences under s 50BA(1) carry a maximum penalty of 17 years imprisonment. The offences under s 50BC(1)(a) carry a maximum penalty of 12 years imprisonment. On each of the first 4 counts under s 50BA(1) the applicant received a sentence of 5 years imprisonment with a non parole period of 3 years. On the fifth count under s 50BA(1) the applicant received a sentence of 5 years imprisonment with a non parole period of 2 years. On each of the counts under s 50BC(1)(a) the applicant received a sentence of 3 years imprisonment with a non parole period of 2 years. The partial accumulation of these sentences resulted in an aggregate sentence of 7 years and 6 months imprisonment, with an aggregate non parole period of 4 years and 6 months.

4 The sole ground of the appeal is that his Honour placed undue weight on the principle of specific deterrence in arriving at the sentences he imposed, resulting in an overall sentence that was manifestly excessive. It is not necessary to canvass the facts in relation to the offences in any significant detail in order to deal with this ground. The following summary is taken from the written submissions filed on the applicant’s behalf.

5 The applicant departed Australia from Sydney on Sunday 29 January 2005 to the Philippines and returned on 20 February 2005. Upon his return the Australian Customs Service conducted a search of the applicant's…

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 Sage v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Sage v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 224
Case: [2007] NSWCCA 224
Decision Date: 27 July 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Sage v The Queen, the appellant, Sage, sought to appeal against the severity of a sentence imposed following his pleas of guilty to a series of sexual offences against children, which were committed outside Australia. The case was heard and determined in a court of appeal. The central issue before the court was whether the sentencing judge had placed undue emphasis on specific deterrence in arriving at the sentence, and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive given the circumstances of the case.

The court was required to examine the sentencing principles as outlined in sections 50BA(1) and 50BC(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). These sections mandate that the court must consider the culpability of the offender, the need for denunciation, and the necessity for specific and general deterrence. The court also had to assess whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. In doing so, the court considered the gravity of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, and the impact of the offences on the victims.

After a thorough examination of the sentencing remarks and the applicable legal principles, the court concluded that the sentencing judge had appropriately balanced the various considerations and had not unduly emphasised specific deterrence. The court found that the sentence, while severe, was not manifestly excessive given the nature and circumstances of the offences committed. The court upheld the original sentence, finding it to be just and proportionate to the gravity of the crimes.

No further orders were made by the court.

Orders