Loading...
Queensland Judgments

beta

Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment
  • {solid} Appeal Determined (QCA)

R v OT

 

[2018] QCA 28

 

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

 

CITATION:

R v OT [2018] QCA 28

PARTIES:

R
v
OT
(appellant/applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 24 of 2017

DC No 173 of 2016

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Maroochydore – Date of Sentence: 10 February 2017 (Jones DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

9 March 2018

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

18 August 2017

JUDGES:

Fraser and McMurdo JJA and McMeekin J

ORDER:

The application for leave to appeal against sentence, on counts 1 and 9, be refused.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – OTHER MATTERS – where the appellant was convicted of 14 counts of sexual offending – where the appellant successfully appealed against conviction in relation to 12 of the 14 counts – where the appellant’s appeal against conviction on two counts was dismissed – where the appellant also made an application for leave to appeal against sentence – where the application for leave to appeal against sentence was not pursued at the hearing and the appellant did not make any further written submissions in relation to that application – whether the sentences on the remaining two counts had been increased to reflect the overall criminality involved in committing 14 counts as originally convicted

COUNSEL:

D A Holliday for the appellant/applicant

G J Cummings for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant/applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

  1. FRASER JA:  I agree with the reasons for judgment of McMurdo JA and the order proposed by his Honour.
  2. McMURDO JA:  The appellant was convicted of 14 counts of sexual offending against his stepdaughter.  He appealed against those convictions and this Court allowed that appeal on 12 of the counts, setting aside the convictions and ordering a re-trial.  His appeal against conviction on counts 1 and 9 was dismissed.
  3. He had applied for leave to appeal against sentence.  That application was not pursued at the hearing of his appeal against the convictions.  However, when deciding the appeal, this Court considered that the application for leave to appeal against sentence should not be then refused, in case the appellant wanted to say that his sentences on those two offences had been higher to reflect the overall criminality involved in committing 14 offences.  The parties were invited to make written submissions about that question.
  4. The appellant, through his counsel, has advised that the appellant does not make any submission.  The respondent says that there is nothing in the sentencing remarks to suggest that the sentences imposed on these two counts were increased to take account of the overall criminality alleged and found at the trial.  In these circumstances, I would order that the application for leave to appeal against sentence, on counts 1 and 9, be refused.
  5. McMEEKIN J:  I have read the reasons of McMurdo JA and agree with the reasons and order that his Honour proposes.

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    R v OT

  • Shortened Case Name:

    R v OT

  • MNC:

    [2018] QCA 28

  • Court:

    QCA

  • Judge(s):

    Fraser JA, McMurdo JA, McMeekin J

  • Date:

    09 Mar 2018

Litigation History

Event Citation or File Date Notes
Primary Judgment DC173/16 (No Citation) 10 Feb 2017 Date of Sentence (Jones DCJ).
Appeal Determined (QCA) [2018] QCA 28 09 Mar 2018 Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused: Fraser and McMurdo JJA and McMeekin J.

Appeal Status

{solid} Appeal Determined (QCA)