Baumer v The Queen [1988] HCA 67

Baumer v The Queen [1988] HCA 67

The proper construction of Criminal Code N.T. s. 154(4) is that intoxication is not to be dealt with by a separate second stage of sentencing, but the court must sentence for the offence as a whole, including intoxication, having regard to the increased maximum penalty produced by s. 154(4). Because the Court of Criminal Appeal proceeded on conflicting and erroneous approaches to that construction, and because aspects of the sentencing judge's reasoning concerning prior record and propensity were open to misunderstanding, the appeal was allowed and the matter remitted for sentence and disqualification to be dealt with according to law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Special Leave Application and Appeal Against Sentence / High Court Application for Extension of Time and Special Leave to Appeal From the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory
Outcome
Application for extension of time granted; special leave granted; appeal allowed; matter remitted to the Court of Criminal Appeal.
Legal Topics
['culpable Driving Causing Grievous Harm' 'dangerous Acts or Omissions' 'intoxication as an Aggravating Factor' 'construction of Criminal Code N.t. S. 154(4)' 'prior Criminal Record and Propensity in Sentencing' 'driver Licence Disqualification']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['culpable Driving Causing Grievous Harm' 'dangerous Acts or Omissions' 'intoxication as an Aggravating Factor' 'construction of Criminal Code N.t. S. 154(4)' 'prior Criminal Record and Propensity in Sentencing' 'driver Licence Disqualification']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Special Leave Application and Appeal Against Sentence / High Court Application for Extension of Time and Special Leave to Appeal From the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Criminal Code N.T. s. 154(4) requires a sentencing court to take a two-stage approach by separately considering intoxication and imposing a further penalty.' 'How the higher maximum penalty created by Criminal Code N.T. s. 154(4) should affect sentencing for culpable driving causing grievous harm.' "Whether the sentencing judge's references to the applicant's prior driving record and propensity risked increasing the sentence beyond that appropriate for the offence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The proper construction of Criminal Code N.T. s. 154(4) is that intoxication is not to be dealt with by a separate second stage of sentencing, but the court must sentence for the offence as a whole, including intoxication, having regard to the increased maximum penalty produced by s. 154(4). Because the Court of Criminal Appeal proceeded on conflicting and erroneous approaches to that construction, and because aspects of the sentencing judge's reasoning concerning prior record and propensity were open to misunderstanding, the appeal was allowed and the matter remitted for sentence and disqualification to be dealt with according to law.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time granted; special leave granted; appeal allowed; matter remitted to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Orders

  • ['Application for an extension of time in which to apply for special leave to appeal granted.' 'Application for special leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory in so far as it dismisses the appeal to that Court.'...