Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
- Unreported Judgment
- Appeal Determined (QCA)
R v Lindley QCA 20
 QCA 20
COURT OF APPEAL
CA No 126 of 2018
DC No 64 of 2018
DC No 65 of 2018
LINDLEY, Shaun Andrew Applicant
MONDAY, 18 FEBRUARY 2019
BURNS J: On 26 April 2018, the applicant pleaded guilty in the District Court at Toowoomba to one count of armed robbery as well as two summary offences. At the time when he was sentenced, the applicant was serving a period of imprisonment, also for armed robbery. That circumstance, together with the feature that armed robbery is one of the serious violent offences listed in schedule 1 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), meant that any period of imprisonment imposed with respect to the subject offence was required to be served cumulatively with the term he was already serving (see s 156A).
In that regard, on 15 December 2016, the applicant was sentenced in the District Court at Brisbane to three years imprisonment for armed robbery with personal violence. He was released from custody on 7 June 2017 but his parole was suspended four months later on 5 October 2017. Three days later he committed the subject offence and, the day after he was apprehended, his parole was cancelled. His full-time release date for this sentence is 17December 2019.
The circumstances of this offence were aptly described as amateurish. The applicant walked into a fast-food store, held out a small flick knife and demanded money. He said to the person behind the counter, “Give me your money or I’ll stab you”. There were unsuccessful attempts to placate him, but the applicant told the manager of the store that if he did not receive $20 he would “jump the counter and stab him”. The manager acceded to this demand after which the applicant left.
The following day, the applicant participated in a formal record of interview with police. He candidly admitted committing the offence. He said that he was “drunk and stupid”. He told police that he intended to spend the money from the robbery “at the pub”.
At the time of the offence, the applicant was 47 years of age. He has a lengthy criminal history stretching back to 1989 including convictions for many property and domestic violence offences. Relevantly, he has three previous convictions for armed robbery, in 1999, 2013 and 2016, with each being similar in execution and seriousness to the subject offending. The recurring theme throughout his criminal history is alcohol-fuelled offending. There is also a suggestion that the applicant suffers from cerebral palsy.
In the court below, the applicant was sentenced to three years imprisonment to commence at the end of his then current period of imprisonment, with parole eligibility set for 26 April 2020. As to the summary offences, he was convicted and not further punished.
In support of this application for leave to appeal against sentence, the applicant complains that the sentence was manifestly excessive. He points to the feature that he thinks it is unlikely that he will be released on parole and will be forced to serve the whole sentence. That, however, is a matter for the parole board to determine.
Given, in particular, his criminal history, the sentence imposed in the court below was not manifestly excessive. To the contrary, it was a moderate sentence that took proper account of the question of totality as well as the factors personal to the applicant.
It follows that the application must be dismissed.
FRASER JA: I agree.
GOTTERSON JA: I also agree.
FRASER JA: The order of the Court is that the application is dismissed.
- Published Case Name:
R v Lindley
- Shortened Case Name:
R v Lindley
 QCA 20
Fraser JA, Gotterson JA, Burns JA
18 Feb 2019
|Event||Citation or File||Date||Notes|
|Primary Judgment||DC64/18; DC65/18 (No Citation)||26 Apr 2018||Date of Sentence.|
|Appeal Determined (QCA)|| QCA 20||18 Feb 2019||Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused: Fraser and Gotterson JJA and Burns J.|