//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2000] QCA 399
Court of Appeal (Qld)
2000-09-28
Jersey CJ, Pincus JA, Thomas JA
Original judgment source is linked above.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The applicant for leave to appeal was sentenced to three years' imprisonment to be suspended after 18 months for three years. He committed two offences of house-breaking and one of entering a dwelling. There were other offences of stealing, false pretences and attempted house-breaking which attracted lower terms of imprisonment.
He had a very substantial prior criminal history covering a period of eight years involving many offences of dishonesty and offences like those for which he was sentenced on this occasion. When he was sentenced he was 26 years old and the relevant offending covered the preceding three years.
Because of his drug problem and apparently because of a defence request for some certainty about his release date, the sentencing Judge suspended the sentences rather than recommending eligibility for parole. While it is true that property of great value was not involved, the learned Judge was rightly influenced by the need to deter crime like this which is prevalent in the community.
The cases of Hadden, CA 198 of 1996, and Peat, CA 187 of 1991, suggest to me that the three year term was at least mid-range for house-breaking by an offender with this prior record and arguably low range. That being so, the Judge's not having contemplated release prior to the applicant's serving one half of the head sentence does not mean that that sentence should be regarded as manifestly excessive and not reflecting properly the significance of the pleas of guilty. I would refuse the application.
R
Donald [2000] QCA 399