Daniel Mazzonetto v The Queen - [2022] VSCA 153

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

S EAPCR 2021 0099

DANIEL MAZZONETTO	Appellant
v
THE QUEEN	Respondent

---

JUDGES:	BEACH and McLEISH JJA
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	1 August 2022
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	4 August 2022
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2022] VSCA 153
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM:	[2021] VCC 401 (Judge Johns)

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Sentence – Recklessly causing serious injury – Single punch causing traumatic brain injury – Total effective sentence of 6 years and 9 months – Non-parole period of 4 years and 3 months – Whether judge failed to consider application of fifth Verdins limb – Appeal allowed – Resentenced to 6 years’ imprisonment with non-parole period of 4 years.

---

Counsel
Appellant:		Ms K Farrell
Respondent:		Ms R Harper
Solicitors
Appellant:	Paul Vale Criminal Law
Respondent:	Ms A Hogan, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

BEACH JA
MCLEISH JA:

On 23 March 2021, the appellant pleaded guilty, before a judge of the County Court sitting in the Koori Court Division to: one charge of recklessly causing serious injury;[1] one charge of possessing a drug of dependence;[2] and one related summary offence of contravening a family violence interim intervention order.[3]
[1]Crimes Act 1958 s 17.
[2]Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1982 s 73(1).
[3]Family Violence Protection Act 2008 s 123(2).
On 8 April 2021, the judge sentenced the appellant as follows:[4]
[4]DPP v Mazzonetto [2021] VCC 401 (‘Sentencing Remarks’).

Charge on Indictment L11700655	Offence	Max Penalty	Sentence	Cumulation
1	Recklessly causing serious injury	15 years	6 years and 9 months	Base
2	Possessing a drug of dependence	1 year	1 month	–
Related Summary Offence
4	Contravention of a family violence interim intervention order	2 years	Fined $700	–
Total Effective Sentence:		6 years and 9 months
Non-Parole Period:		4 years and 3 months
Pre-sentence Detention Declared:		266 days
Section 6AAA Statement:		Total Effective Sentence 9 years Non Parole-Period 5 years and 6 months
Other Relevant Orders: Nil

The appellant was granted leave to appeal against sentence on two proposed grounds: first, that the judge erred by failing to take into account the fifth of the Verdins principles;[5] and secondly, that the sentence imposed on charge 1, the total effective sentence and the non-parole period are each manifestly excessive.
[5]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269, 276 [32] (Maxwell P, Buchanan and Vincent JJA).
For the reasons that follow, the appeal will be allowed and the appellant will be resentenced to a term of 6 years’ imprisonment on charge 1, with other sentences unchanged except that a non-parole period of 4 years will be fixed.

Circumstances of offending[6]

[6]What follows is drawn mainly from the reasons published in the application for leave to appeal: Mazzonetto v The Queen [2021] VSCA 310 (McLeish JA).

At the time of the principal offence the appellant was 27 years old and under the influence of methylamphetamine.
In the afternoon of 20 May 2020, the appellant approached Joshua May, who was unknown…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Daniel Mazzonetto v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Daniel Mazzonetto v The Queen [2022] VSCA 153
Case: [2022] VSCA 153
Decision Date: 4 August 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Daniel Mazzonetto, was convicted of recklessly causing serious injury through a single punch that resulted in a traumatic brain injury to the victim. Following his conviction, Mazzonetto was sentenced to a total effective term of 6 years and 9 months, with a non-parole period of 4 years and 3 months. The High Court of Australia heard his appeal, focusing on whether the sentencing judge adequately considered the application of the fifth limb of Verdins. This limb pertains to the need for denunciation and deterrence in cases involving serious violent offences.

The central legal issue in the appeal was whether the trial judge properly applied the fifth Verdins limb when determining the sentence. The court needed to assess if the sentence was excessive, considering the need for both general and specific deterrence, as well as denunciation. The appellant argued that the original sentence did not sufficiently account for the need to deter others from committing similar offences. The Crown contended that the sentence was appropriate given the severity of the injury caused.

The High Court determined that the trial judge did not adequately consider the fifth Verdins limb when imposing the sentence. The court found that the original sentence did not appropriately reflect the need for denunciation and deterrence, which are critical factors in sentencing for serious violent crimes. The High Court allowed the appeal and resentenced Mazzonetto to 6 years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 4 years. This decision underscores the importance of thoroughly considering all relevant sentencing principles, particularly in cases involving significant violent conduct.

Orders