Court of Appeal (Qld)|2000-09-12|Before: Pincus JA, Muir J, Jones J

R v Franklin [2000] QCA 369 (12 September 2000)

PINCUS JA: In this application it appears that the applicant has not reached the category of being incorrigible, by any means. He seems to have some difficulty with slowness.

It has been argued by Mr Rafter on behalf of the applicant that a more suitable treatment of the matter would involve a two year probation order, rather than three years' suspension, the idea being that in this way he will have more hope of getting through the next period of his life without offending further.

The difficulty I have had with the matter, although I find Mr Rafter's suggestion attractive, is that the suggestion that the sentence imposed below was manifestly excessive may seem difficult to support. On the whole, however, and not without some doubt, I have formed the opinion that that test is satisfied.

The orders will therefore be, application granted, appeal allowed; the sentences are confirmed except the sentence with respect to dangerous operation of a vehicle.

On that count, that is dangerous operation of a vehicle, the sentence imposed below will be set aside and in lieu it will be ordered that the applicant serve four months imprisonment and the Court will make a probation order for 2 years on the terms set out in section 93 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992, to which is added that the applicant must report to an authorised Corrective Service Officer at Ipswich within 48 hours of release from prison.

PINCUS JA: The disqualification from holding or applying for a driver's licence imposed by the learned sentencing Judge will stand.

JONES J: And I agree with the reasons for the presiding Judge and the orders proposed.

R v Franklin [2000] QCA 369

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (10 paragraphs)

R v Franklin [2000] QCA 369 (12 September 2000)

Parties

Legislation Cited (1)