R v BDZ

[2023] QCA 59

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Application for leave to appeal against sentence
4. › Grounds for interference
5. › Sentence manifestly excessive or inadequate
6. › Grievous bodily harm to infant
7. › Whether sentence manifestly excessive in absence of early parole eligibility
8. › Criminal Code (Qld), ss 1, 317, 320
9. › Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), ss 9(c)(i), 9(10A), 161B(5)
10. › Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld), s 184(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Parole eligibility
4. › Whether sentencing judge required to impose early parole eligibility date in response to mitigating considerations such as plea of guilty
5. › Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld), s 184(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Assessment of seriousness of offence
4. › Relevance of consequences of offending to seriousness
5. › Grievous bodily harm
6. › Permanent catastrophic injury to infant
7. › Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 9(c)(i)

Quick Take

A sentencing judge is not required to impose an early parole eligibility date in response to mitigating considerations such as a plea of guilty; those considerations may instead be reflected in the head sentence. Where grievous bodily harm results in permanent catastrophic injury, particularly to a vulnerable infant victim, the consequences are a very weighty consideration that may justify a sentence at the higher end of the range even absent intent to cause grievous bodily harm.