Wardrop v Keen

[1993] QCA 143

[1993] QCA 143

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

C.A. No. 367 of 1992

Brisbane

[Wardrop v. Keen]

ROBERT SEAN WARDROP

- and -

GLEN THOMAS KEEN

Appellant

The President
Mr Justice McPherson

Mr Justice Shepherdson

Judgment delivered 23/04/93

Judgment of the Court

APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION DISMISSED. APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO
APPEAL REFUSED.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - SENTENCE - Taxi driver assaulted off-duty policeman - Conviction recorded - whether sentence manifestly excessive.

Counsel:	Mr A. Rafter for the appellant Mr P. Ridgeway for the Crown
Solicitors:	Legal Aid Office for the appellant Director of Prosecutions for the Crown
Hearing Date(s):	07/04/93

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

C.A. No. 367 of 1992

Brisbane
Before The President

Mr Justice McPherson

Mr Justice Shepherdson

[Wardrop v. Keen]

ROBERT SEAN WARDROP

v.

GLEN THOMAS KEEN

(Appellant)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - THE COURT

Judgment delivered 23/04/93
The appellant has appealed against his conviction in the Magistrates Court at Brisbane on 25 November 1992 of an offence of common assault.
He was fined $200, ordered to pay $149.50 compensation, allowed three months to pay and, in default, sentenced to imprisonment for one month. A conviction was recorded. An application for leave to appeal against sentence has been added and briefly pursued to seek a sentence which does not involve the recording of a conviction.
The notice of appeal contains a number of grounds of appeal which either were not argued or only faintly pressed and which were disposed of in the course of argument. Indeed, Counsel for the appellant correctly recognised that there was little that he could say in support of the appeal.

The offence arose out of an altercation on Saturday 3rd October 1992 between the complainant, who was an off duty police officer, and the appellant, who was driving a taxi which the complainant and a female companion entered at the Edward Street taxi rank to be driven to Enoggera.

The Magistrate accepted the evidence of the complainant and the female who accompanied him, who said that the appellant became abusive after the complainant directed him to turn left into Queen Street after leaving the taxi rank. Their evidence was that the appellant was directed to stop the taxi and that, after the complainant had paid a fare of $3.00 and had been given his change, the appellant again became abusive, got out of the taxi and grabbed hold of the complainant's arm to remove him forcibly. They also said that the complainant's expensive shirt was destroyed as he was dragged from the taxi.

The appellant gave a contrary version of events which the Magistrate rejected as he was entitled to do. The contrary was not asserted.

There is no substance in the appeal, which must be

dismissed.
The appellant is 40 years of age and has no prior criminal
history except for two drink driving convictions some years ago.

There is a possibility - but no more - that he will have

difficulty in having his permit to drive a taxi renewed.
Nothing which was said on behalf of the appellant indicates any error by the magistrate with respect to the sentence imposed which was well within the discretion which he exercised.

In the circumstances, the application for leave to appeal against sentence is refused.