Site Logo

R v EQ [2021] QCA 257

The offender was sentenced following a plea of guilty to making a statement that they knew to be false to the effect that there has been, is or will be a plan, proposal, attempt, conspiracy or threat contrary to s 28 of the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 (Cth). Original sentence imposed 6 years imprisonment. The offender appealed on the basis that the sentencing judge erred in law by wrongly limiting the use to be made of evidence of the offender’s mental health; and the sentence was manifestly excessive; and the sentencing judge mistook the offence to which the offender had pleaded guilty.  

Nature and Circumstances: Sentence hearing proceeded upon basis that offender was to be sentenced for an offence against s 28(2)(b), but the offender had not been convicted of an offence against that provision. The relevant offence provision was 28(1)(a). The sentencing judge sentenced the offender for an offence with which they were not charged ad to which they had not pleaded guilty. The offending was serious. It significantly impacted upon the commercial operations of the airport, terrified the persons in the airport at the time, including the offender’s estranged wife and two daughters and placed police officers at risk and in concern for their safety. The offender’s estranged wife and daughters continue to suffer psychologically.  

Leave to appeal granted. Appeal allowed. Sentence set aside. Offender re-sentenced to 5 years imprisonment with 2 year and 6 month non-parole period.
The CSD acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as First Australians and recognises their culture, history, diversity and their deep connection to the land. We acknowledge that we are on the land of the traditional owners and pay respects to Elders past and present.

© 2023 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions