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

R v Mulder[2002] QCA 455

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

PARTIES:

FILE NO/S:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

DELIVERED EXTEMPORE ON:

28 October 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

28 October 2002

JUDGES:

de Jersey CJ, McPherson JA, Mullins J

Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

1.Application for leave to appeal against sentences imposed on 3 June 2002 for counts 2 and 3 granted.

2.Application for leave to appeal against sentence imposed on 15 July 2002 refused.

3.In respect of the sentences for which leave to appeal has been granted, the appeal is allowed in respect of those sentences and the sentences are varied by the addition of the declaration that:

“Pursuant to section 161 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992, it is declared that 105 days spent in pre-sentence custody between 18 February 2002 and 3 June 2002 be deemed time already served under the sentences.”

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS – APPLICATION TO REDUCE SENTENCE – WHEN GRANTED – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – PROPERTY OFFENCES – applicant pleaded guilty to 2 counts – applicant had been in pre-sentence custody – a declaration under s 161 Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) should have been made in respect of that pre-sentence custody – declaration made

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS – APPLICATION TO REDUCE SENTENCE – WHEN REFUSED – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – PROPERTY OFFENCES – applicant charged with 3 counts – applicant initially pleaded guilty to counts 2 and 3  – separate custodial sentences imposed for each count – applicant pleaded guilty to count 1 – applicant received custodial sentence to be served concurrently with other sentences – whether custodial sentence imposed for count 2 is manifestly excessive – where sentence imposed exceeded range submitted by prosecutor – whether sentence should reflect range submitted – where applicant had significant prior criminal history – where sentence coupled with post present community based release recommendation – in those circumstances sentence not manifestly excessive

Penalties And Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 161

COUNSEL:

AJ Rafter for the applicant

PD Kelly for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

MULLINS J:  The applicant applies for leave to appeal against three sentences.  The applicant pleaded guilty to counts 2 and 3 on indictment 185 of 2002 presented at Maroochydore District Court on 3 June 2002.  Count 2 was breaking and entering premises and stealing. Count 3 was wilful damage.  These offences were committed on 18 February 2002.

 

On count 2, the applicant was sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment.  On count 3, the applicant was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment.  It was recommended that the applicant be eligible for post-prison community based release after serving 12 months.

 

Count 1 on that indictment was also a charge of breaking and entering premises and stealing, but in respect of events which occurred on 27 May 2000.  The applicant pleaded guilty to that offence of 15 July 2002 and was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment which was to be served concurrently with the sentences imposed on 3 June 2002.

 

There was confusion at the sentence hearing on 3 June 2002 about what suspended sentences needed to be dealt with.  The applicant had been in custody between 18 February 2002 and 3 June 2002 in respect of counts 2 and 3 and a summary offence of contravene direction on 18 February 2002 which arose out of the police investigation of the offences which are counts 2 and 3.

 

That summary offence was dealt with in the Magistrates Court on 24 July 2002 for which the applicant was fined $300, in default six days imprisonment to be served concurrently with the existing sentences.

 

It is common ground that a declaration under section 161 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 should have been made when the applicant was sentenced on 3 June 2002 in respect of the period of 105 days between 18 February and 3 June 2002.

 

The applicant also submits that the sentence of two and a half years imprisonment for count 2 exceeded the range submitted by the Prosecutor of 18 months to two years and that the sentence in respect of count 2 should be varied to conform with that range.  That sentence was imposed, however, with the applicant being given the benefit of the recommendation of post-prison community based release after 12 months.

 

At the time of sentencing on 3 June 2002 the applicant had a significant prior criminal history and had committed the offence on 18 February 2002 during the operational period of suspended sentences imposed on 14 June 2002.

 

The sentence of two and a half years coupled with the post-prison community based release recommendation was not manifestly excessive.

 

I would therefore grant the application for leave to appeal in respect of the sentences imposed on 3 June 2002 for counts 2 and 3 and otherwise refuse the application for leave to appeal against the sentence imposed on 15 July 2002.

 

In respect of the sentences in respect of which I would grant leave to appeal I would allow the appeal in respect of those sentences and vary the sentences by the addition of the following declaration:

 

"Pursuant to section 161 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992, it is declared that 105 days spent in pre-sentence custody between 18 February 2002 and 3 June 2002 be deemed time already served under the sentences."

 

THE CHIEF JUSTICE:  I agree.

 

McPHERSON JA:  I also agree.

 

THE CHIEF JUSTICE:  Those are the orders.

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    R v Mulder

  • Shortened Case Name:

    R v Mulder

  • MNC:

    [2002] QCA 455

  • Court:

    QCA

  • Judge(s):

    de Jersey CJ, McPherson JA, Mullins J

  • Date:

    28 Oct 2002

Litigation History

EventCitation or FileDateNotes
Primary JudgmentDC No 185 of 2002 (no citation)03 Jun 2002Defendant pleaded guilty on 3 June 2002 to breaking and entering premises and stealing (count 2) and wilful damage (count 3); sentenced to concurrent terms of two and a half years' and 12 months' imprisonment and recommended for post-prison community based release after 12 months
Primary JudgmentDC No 185 of 2002 (no citation)15 Jul 2002Defendant pleaded guilty on 15 July 2002 to further charge of breaking and entering premises and stealing (count 1); sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment to be served concurrently with sentences imposed on counts 2 and 3
Appeal Determined (QCA)[2002] QCA 45528 Oct 2002Defendant applied for leave to appeal against sentences for counts 1, 2 and 3; whether sentences manifestly excessive; where pre-sentence custody not declared as time served; leave granted in respect of counts 2 and 3, appeal allowed to the extent of declaring 105 days pre-sentence custody as time served and application dismissed in respect of count 1: de Jersey CJ, McPherson JA and Mullins J

Appeal Status

Appeal Determined (QCA)

Cases Cited

No judgments cited by this judgment.

Cases Citing

Case NameFull CitationFrequency
Chisholm v Wanklin [2009] QDC 2862 citations
Michelmore v Hail Creek Coal Holdings Pty Limited [2021] QLAC 41 citation
R v Vaughan [2005] QCA 3483 citations
1

Require Technical Assistance?

Message sent!

Thanks for reaching out! Someone from our team will get back to you soon.

Message not sent!

Something went wrong. Please try again.