//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2001] QCA 172
Court of Appeal (Qld)
2001-05-11
Thomas and Williams JJA, White JSeparate reasons for judgment of each, member of the Court, each concurring as the orders made
Original judgment source is linked above.
CRIMINAL LAW - JURISDICTION PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT - SENTENCE - FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT - MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS - OFFENCE COMMITTED WHILE ON BAIL OR PAROLE AND EFFECT OF BREACH OF PAROLE - where applicant on parole at time of committing offences - considering the statutory framework for sentencing, the 'totality principle' cannot be applied directly - the function of the sentencing judge is to impose a sentence having regard to the criminality of the current offences; in doing so s 9 Penalties and Sentences Act requires the Judge to consider that the sentence will be cumulative upon a sentence for past offences
CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE - APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS - APPLICATIONS TO REDUCE SENTENCE - WHEN GRANTED - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON -where applicant pleaded guilty to unlawful wounding, being in a dwelling with intent to commit an indictable offence and wilfully and unlawfully destroying a toilet - a starting point of four to five years imprisonment is too high for the offence of wounding - a starting point of no more than three years is appropriate
Corrective Services Act 1988 (Qld), s 187, 190, 207B
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9(1)(a), s 9(2)(l) and (m), s 156A,
Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 (Qld), s 8, s 9
Harris v Muirhead [1993] 2 Qd R 527, cited
R v Anderson CA No 90 of 1998, 11 September 1998, considered
R v Bojovic [1999] QCA 206; [2000] 2 Qd R 183, applied
R v Booth [2001] 1 Qd R 393, considered
R v Briese ex parte A-G [1997] QCA 10; [1998] 1 Qd R 487; (1997) 92 A Crim R 75, cited
R v Coonan CA No 83 of 1995, 26 April 1995, applied
R v Byrnes CA No 126 of 1999, 18 June 1999, considered
R v Maclean and Bannerman [2000] QCA 367; CA Nos 71 and 98 of 2000, 12 September 2000, considered
R v Meehan CA No 128 of 1996, 5 June 1996, applied
R v Mill [1988] HCA 70; (1988) 166 CLR 59, cited
R v Pettigrew [1996] QCA 235; [1997] 1 Qd R 601, cited
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent
R
Shillingsworth [2001] QCA 172
(1988) 166 CLR 59