The Queen v DGA

[2012] QChC 36

[2012] QChC 36

CHILDRENS COURT OF QUEENSLAND

JUDGE DICK SC

THE QUEEN

v.

DGA

BRISBANE

..DATE 16/11/2012

..DAY 1

SENTENCE

HER HONOUR: This is an application made pursuant to section 118 of the Youth Justice Act [1992] for a review of the sentence imposed by the Mount Garnet Childrens Court on the 18th of July, 2012.

The applicant on that date pleaded guilty to three offences.  One attempted enter premises and commit an indictable offence; one enter premises and commit an indictable offence; and one count of receiving.

The first of those offences happened in September of 2011, when the child acted as a look out for friends who tried to enter the Mount Garnet General Store.  He was 13 at the time. He made full admissions.  And was initially sentenced to an indefinite referral to a Youth Justice Conference.

The other two offences happened on the same day, the 26th of February, 2012.  He was with friends.  At that time he was 14 years of age.  Once again, he made full admissions to the offence.

It is submitted that the submissions made by the defence lawyer at the time of the sentence were limited.  There was no detailed discussion about his attendance at school, or how he was progressing.  It had been five months between the two offences.

It appears that he did not attend the conference which was initially ordered, but no explanation was given to the Court as to reasons, and I assume no questions were asked about why he had not attended.  Although, from the transcript, I am told that it appears that the Department representative informed the Court that the child did not attend the Conference due to a misunderstanding.

The sentence imposed by the Magistrate was six months probation.  No convictions were recorded.  That sentence was stayed by her Honour, Judge Richards, on the 21st of September,  2012.  So he has served about two months of the probation.

At the present time he is attending school, and participating in sports and other activities.  He has not been in trouble again.  He was young at the time, and had a prior good history.  And the Prosecution concede that the six months probation was excessive, considering all those circumstances.

I set aside the sentence imposed by the Magistrate, and I re‑sentence the applicant.

In respect of each count to which he pleaded guilty, I order that the child be of good behaviour, abstain from violation of the law, for a period of four months from today.  I have chosen the lower end because of the two months probation which he has already undergone.  Of course, no conviction is recorded.

‑‑‑‑‑