Chen v R

Chen appealed against his sentence for a reckless wounding offence. The trial judge found that the offence was deliberate, and that the sentence was appropriate and not manifestly excessive. Chen sought leave to appeal on the basis that the trial judge had erred in finding that the offence was deliberate and in applying the approach to recklessness in Blackwell v R to reckless wounding offences. Chen also contended that the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court considered whether there was a patent or latent error that established the trial judge's findings were wrong or that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The court held that there was no patent error because the trial judge had not misunderstood the law. The court also held that there was no latent error because the trial judge had correctly applied the law to the facts of the case. The court found that the trial judge had properly considered the factors relevant to the sentence, including the nature and circumstances of the offence, and had not erred in finding that the sentence was appropriate. The court held that the approach to recklessness in Blackwell v R was not limited to cases of murder and could be applied to reckless wounding offences. The court also held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive because it was within the range of sentences that could be imposed for the offence. The appeal was dismissed.