Queensland Judgments
Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

Aramoana v The Commissioner of Queensland Police Service[2021] QDC 19

Aramoana v The Commissioner of Queensland Police Service[2021] QDC 19

 

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

 

CITATION:

Aramoana v The Commissioner of Queensland Police Service [2021] QDC 19

PARTIES:

DARYL GRANT ARAMOANA

(Appellant)

v

THE COMMISSIONER OF QUEENSLAND POLICE SERVICE

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

2429 of 20

DIVISION:

Appellate

PROCEEDING:

Appeal pursuant to section 222 Justices Act 1866

ORIGINATING COURT:

Magistrates Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

12 February 2021, ex tempore

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

4, 12 February 2021

JUDGE:

Loury QC DCJ

ORDER:

  1. Leave to amend the Notice of Appeal is granted.
  1. Leave to adduce new evidence is granted.
  1. The appeal is allowed.
  1. Set aside the sentences imposed in the Magistrates Court.
  1. Resentence the appellant as follows:
  1. (a)
    For each of two counts of enter premises and stealing the appellant is sentenced to six months imprisonment suspended immediately for an operational period of 12 months.
  1. (b)
    For each of two counts of entering premises with intent to commit an indictable offence the appellant is sentenced to six months imprisonment suspended immediately for an operational period of 12 months.
  1. (c)
    For each of two counts of stealing from a locked receptacle the appellant is sentenced to six months imprisonment suspended immediately for an operational period of 12 months.
  1. (d)
    For unlawfully using a motor vehicle the appellant is sentenced to 12 months probation.
  1. (e)
    For possessing of a dangerous drug the appellant is sentenced to 12 months probation.
  1. (f)
    For possession of a restricted drug the appellant is convicted and not further punished.
  1. (g)
    For failing to take reasonable care and precaution in respect of a needle the appellant is convicted and not further punished.
  1. (h)
    Sentences of imprisonment are to be served concurrently.

LEGISLATION:

Crimes Act 1914 s 20

Criminal Code Act 1899 ss 398, 408A, 421

Drugs Misuse Act 1986 ss 9, 10

Health (Drugs and Poisons) Regulation 1996 s 204
Justices Act 1886 ss 222

Magistrates Courts Act 1921 ss 14, 14A

House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499

McDonald v Queensland Police Service [2018] 2 Qd R 612

Robinson Helicopter Co Inc v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 90 ALJR 679

COUNSEL:

J Feely for the appellant

K McFarlane for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

KLM Solicitors for the appellant

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the respondent

  1. [1]
    The appellant pleaded guilty to 10 offences in the Magistrates Court at Wynnum on 21 August 2020. They were: two counts of enter premises and stealing; two counts of entering premises with intent to commit an indictable offence; one count of unlawfully using a motor vehicle; two counts of stealing from a locked receptacle; one count of possessing a dangerous drug; one count of possession of a restricted drug and one count of failing to take reasonable care and precaution in respect of a needle. He was sentenced that same day to a “global sentence” of two months imprisonment following which he was to be released on probation for a period of 18 months subject to conditions that he firstly, submit to such medical, psychiatric or psychological assessment and treatment as directed by the probation officer and secondly, that he submit to urinalysis testing and participate in therapeutic intervention to address illicit drug use as required by the probation officer.
  1. [2]
    In relation to the two offences of stealing from a locked receptacle the learned Magistrate was led into error, by the prosecutor informing him that those offences were laid under the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Accordingly he was sentenced to a recognisance pursuant to s 20 (1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1914 in the sum of $2000 to be of good behaviour for a period of 18 months. 

The appeal

  1. [3]
    The appellant appeals pursuant to s 222 of the Justices Act 1886.  Such an appeal is by way of rehearing on the evidence below, that is, a review of the record of proceedings below rather than a fresh hearing, together with any new evidence that I allow to be admitted.   I am required to conduct a real review of the evidence and the learned Magistrate’s decision and make my own determination giving due deference and placing a good deal of weight on the Magistrate’s view.[1] In order to succeed on such an appeal
Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Aramoana v The Commissioner of Queensland Police Service

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Aramoana v The Commissioner of Queensland Police Service

  • MNC:

    [2021] QDC 19

  • Court:

    QDC

  • Judge(s):

    Loury QC DCJ

  • Date:

    12 Feb 2021

Appeal Status

Please note, appeal data is presently unavailable for this judgment. This judgment may have been the subject of an appeal.
Help

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.