R v F [2001] QCA 137

Court of Appeal (Qld)|2001-04-09|Before: Williams JA, White J, Holmes J

WILLIAMS JA: The applicant pleaded guilty on 28 July 2000 in the Ipswich District Court to eight charges alleging sexual offences that he had committed on his step-daughter, C.M.A.

Count 8 alleged that he had maintained an unlawful relationship of a sexual nature with that child who was a child under the age of 16 years and that the relationship involved his having unlawful carnal knowledge of the girl.

The learned sentencing Judge referred to the fact that the offending conduct commenced when the girl was aged 11 at the latest, and did involve sexual intercourse from about that time.

She referred to the fact that the offences had adverse effects on the young girl which were continuing.

The sentence imposed was eight years with respect to the charge of maintaining an unlawful relationship and four years with respect to each of the other seven offences. The sentences were to be served concurrently. Finally, there was a recommendation that the applicant be eligible to apply for release on parole after serving three years.

On 18 December 2000 the applicant lodged an application for an extension of time to appeal against his sentence. In an affidavit he referred to his inability to use words in the context of sentences and to the fact that he is illiterate.

Apparently at some stage another prison inmate made reference to the fact that an appeal could be lodged and it was that circumstance which resulted in this application for leave to extend the time for appealing against sentence. The material has largely been put together by a fellow inmate.

In course of submissions today the applicant, who appeared on his behalf, quite candidly conceded that he had intercourse with the girl when she was aged about 14 years and said that that conduct was done with intent to reap revenge against the girl's mother, his then wife.

In the course of his submissions he intimated that he now disputed that the events in question commenced at a time when the girl was aged about 11 years. However, he has clearly pleaded guilty to all of the offences which were set out on the indictment. He had legal representation at the sentence hearing.

I should also record that the applicant does have a not insignificant criminal history. There are numerous offences, including some property offences, and though it may be true to say that a number of them would have been drink related, the history cannot be ignored.

Having heard the submissions, it is my view that if there was an application for leave to appeal against the sentence, it would have no prospects of success. In those circumstances the application for the extension of time should be refused.

WHITE J: I agree with the reasons and the order proposed by the learned presiding Judge.

WILLIAMS JA: The application for extension of time is refused.

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (14 paragraphs)

Parties