WILLIAMS -v- FRANZINELLI [2001] WASCA 241
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2001] WASCA 241 | |
| Case No: | SJA:1088/2001 | 2 AUGUST 2001 | |
| Coram: | WHITE AUJ | 16/08/01 | |
| 11 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal succeeds to extent that the term of imprisonment is reduced from 9 months to 6 months | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | GLENN DAVID WILLIAMS MARTIN CRAIG FRANZINELLI |
Catchwords: | Appeal Driving offence Fifth conviction for driving under suspension Sentence of imprisonment Whether sentence of 9 months' imprisonment excessive in the circumstances Turns on own facts |
Legislation: | Road Traffic Act 1974 |
Case References: | Calway v Wiebe, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990001; 13 January 1999 Dickman v Turton [2000] WASCA 1 Dragic v Burroughs [2000] WASCA 385 Fernando v Keady, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 940135; 4 March 1994 Jennings v Carson & Anor, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980608; 21 October 1998 Krakouer v Durka, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980595; 14 October 1998 Marshall v Spent [2000] WASCA 114 Stewart v Waghorn [1999] WASCA 150 White v Lambrecht, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 8691; 29 January 1991 Bacich v Illich [2000] WASCA 133 Dinsdale v R (2000) 175 ALR 315 Eldridge v Bates (1989) 51 SASR 532 Griekspoor v Scott [2000] WASCA 419 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Lowndes v R (1999) 195 CLR 665 O'Brien v Ritchie, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990123; 17 March 1999 Police v Cadd (1997) 69 SASR 150 R v Tait (1979) 46 FLR 386 Reynolds v Wilkinson (1948) 51 WALR 17 Veen v R (1988) 164 CLR 465 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA CITATION : WILLIAMS -v- FRANZINELLI [2001] WASCA 241 CORAM : WHITE AUJ HEARD : 2 AUGUST 2001 DELIVERED : 16 AUGUST 2001 FILE NO/S : SJA 1088 of 2001 MATTER : Justices Act 1902
BETWEEN : GLENN DAVID WILLIAMS
- Appellant
AND
MARTIN CRAIG FRANZINELLI
Respondent
Catchwords:
Appeal - Driving offence - Fifth conviction for driving under suspension - Sentence of imprisonment - Whether sentence of 9 months' imprisonment excessive in the circumstances - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Road Traffic Act 1974
Result:
Appeal succeeds to extent that the term of imprisonment is reduced from 9 months to 6 months
(Page 2)
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr D J McKenzie
Respondent : Ms L J Dias
Solicitors:
Appellant : Legal Aid of Western Australia
Respondent : State Crown Solicitor
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Calway v Wiebe, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 990001; 13 January 1999
Dickman v Turton [2000] WASCA 1
Dragic v Burroughs [2000] WASCA 385
Fernando v Keady, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 940135; 4 March 1994
Jennings v Carson & Anor, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980608; 21 October 1998
Krakouer v Durka, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980595; 14 October 1998
Marshall v Spent [2000] WASCA 114
Stewart v Waghorn [1999] WASCA 150
White v Lambrecht, unreported; SCt…
Continue reading Williams v Franzinelli
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Williams v Franzinelli [2001] WASCA 241
- Case
- [2001] WASCA 241
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appellant, Williams, appealed against a sentence of nine months' imprisonment imposed for a fifth conviction of driving under suspension. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland. Williams argued that the sentence was excessive given the circumstances, including his personal situation and previous non-custodial sentences. The respondent, Franzinelli, maintained that the sentence was appropriate given the gravity of the offence and the appellant's history of driving under suspension.
The court was required to determine whether the sentence of imprisonment was excessive in the context of the appellant's circumstances and previous convictions. The court considered the appellant's previous convictions, his remorse and personal circumstances, and the need for the sentence to serve as a general and specific deterrent. The court also considered the impact of the sentence on the appellant and his family.
The court found that while the appellant's history of driving under suspension was serious, the sentence of nine months' imprisonment was excessive. The court noted that the appellant had shown remorse and had taken steps to address his driving issues. The court also considered the impact of the sentence on the appellant's family, who relied on him for financial support. The court reduced the term of imprisonment from nine months to six months, finding that this was a more appropriate sentence in the circumstances. The appeal was therefore partially successful.
The court ordered that the term of imprisonment be reduced from nine months to six months. The appellant was to serve the reduced sentence in a community-based facility, subject to certain conditions. The appellant was also ordered to pay costs of the appeal.
The court was required to determine whether the sentence of imprisonment was excessive in the context of the appellant's circumstances and previous convictions. The court considered the appellant's previous convictions, his remorse and personal circumstances, and the need for the sentence to serve as a general and specific deterrent. The court also considered the impact of the sentence on the appellant and his family.
The court found that while the appellant's history of driving under suspension was serious, the sentence of nine months' imprisonment was excessive. The court noted that the appellant had shown remorse and had taken steps to address his driving issues. The court also considered the impact of the sentence on the appellant's family, who relied on him for financial support. The court reduced the term of imprisonment from nine months to six months, finding that this was a more appropriate sentence in the circumstances. The appeal was therefore partially successful.
The court ordered that the term of imprisonment be reduced from nine months to six months. The appellant was to serve the reduced sentence in a community-based facility, subject to certain conditions. The appellant was also ordered to pay costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal succeeds to extent that the term of imprisonment is reduced from 9 months to 6 months
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.