Boxer's juvenile criminal past may be aired at sentencing

OLYMPIC boxer Damien Hooper could become one of the first people in the state to have his juvenile criminal history aired and taken into consideration when he is eventually sentenced for his latest brush with the law.

The State Government passed the changes to the Youth Justice Act in March which allows sentencing judges across the state to be told of a person's relevant juvenile history so it can be taken into account when determining suitable penalties for offences committed as an adult.

Hooper, 22, who represented Australia at the London Olympics, was arrested during the early hours of January 6 last year outside the Oasis Nightclub in Dalby.

He was subsequently charged with wilful exposure, obstructing police, and serious assault after spitting in a police officer's face while being arrested.

Hooper was due to be sentenced in the Brisbane District Court on Tuesday in relation to the charges.

However, for the second time in as many months sentencing was adjourned.

Judge Michael Noud immediately expressed concerns the matter was not ready to proceed to sentencing.

He said there were a number of issues he did not feel comfortable with including alleged comments Hooper made on Facebook and his barrister's attempts to "water down" the significance of the officer's victim impact statement.

Judge Noud also expressed concerns that if he was to record a conviction it could damage Hooper's career, especially in relation to any future fights overseas, despite noting a conviction had been already recorded against him for a totally unrelated matter.

Crown Prosecutor Dejana Kovac told the court it was her intention to outline Hooper's "significant and lengthy" juvenile history under the changes to the Youth Justice Act so it could be taken into consideration if and when he is sentenced.

Defence barrister Wayne Toltom told the court Hooper would not be contesting that aspect because "it was now the law".

The matter was adjourned for nearly an hour so both parties could digest Judge Noud's remarks and observations.

Both parties agreed that further time was necessary to go over finer details of the case.

Judge Noud swiftly adjourned the sentencing for a date to be fixed.