R v Steindl
[2001] QCA 315
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Appeal Determined (QCA)
- R v Steindl[2001] QCA 315
- Add to List
R v Steindl[2001] QCA 315
R v Steindl[2001] QCA 315
COURT OF APPEAL
McMURDO P
DAVIES JA
THOMAS JA
| CA No 80 of 2001 | |
| THE QUEEN | |
| v. | |
| THOMAS WILLIAM STEINDL | Appellant |
BRISBANE
DATE 03/08/2001
JUDGMENT
THE PRESIDENT: The Court intends to reserve the appeal against conviction and requires a transcript. As to the application for leave to appeal against the sentence, I am satisfied the sentence was manifestly excessive. The applicant has spent 142 days in custody and no greater penalty should have been imposed, than in respect of count 1, a fully suspended sentence of six months and in respect of count 2, a sentence of 18 months suspended forthwith.
At this stage, I would grant the application and allow the appeal and instead of the sentence imposed below in respect of count 1, stealing, I would order the applicant be sentenced to six months' imprisonment, fully suspended, with an operational period of two years and in respect of count 2, a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment, suspended forthwith, with an operational period of two years.
DAVIES JA: I agree.
THOMAS JA: I agree.
THE PRESIDENT: I should add that we will publish our reasons for this later and I note that if the appeal against conviction is successful, the conviction and sentence will automatically go. So that is the order of the Court, thank you.