Doolan v The Queen - [2006] NSWCCA 344

CITATION: Doolan v R [2006] NSWCCA 344

HEARING DATE(S): 18 July 2006

JUDGMENT DATE:
8 November 2006

JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; Hidden J at 6; Hall J at 36

DECISION: Leave to appeal granted, (by majority) appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW: - Application for leave to appeal against sentence - robbery in company - whether adequate weight given to applicant's mental illness.

LEGISLATION CITED: s97(1) Crimes Act 1900

CASES CITED: R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228
R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 107

PARTIES: Rachel Beryl Doolan (applicant)
Regina (respondent)

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2006/885

COUNSEL: C Cragie SC (applicant)
V Lydiard (respondent)

SOLICITORS: N Mills (applicant)
S Kavanagh (respondent)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 05/11/0651

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Donovan QC DCJ

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 9 September 2005

2006/885

McCLELLAN CJ at CL
HIDDEN J
HALL J
Wednesday 8 November 2006

Rachel Beryl DOOLAN v Regina

Judgment

1 McCLELLAN CJ at CL: I have had the benefit of reading the judgment of Hidden J in draft. I gratefully adopt his Honour’s account of the relevant facts and outline the issues to be resolved on the appeal. Unlike his Honour in my view the appeal should be dismissed.

2 Hidden J identifies the fact that the applicant has been diagnosed as suffering from a psychiatric illness which may have played a role in her offending. However, the crime in which she played a not insignificant role was a brutal attack on an innocent person during which the applicant and her co-offender inflicted serious injury. The applicant was not a young offender and she had a criminal history.

3 Notwithstanding her psychiatric problems the guideline in Henry (1999) 46 NMSWLR 346 is of considerable significance when determining the appropriate sentence. It may be that a lesser sentence could have been imposed but the question for this Court is whether an error has occurred which requires this Court to intervene. I am satisfied that such an error has not been demonstrated.

4 In my view the serious nature of the offence required a sentence which marks out the gravity of the applicant’s crime and imposes a significant punishment. The sentence of a non-parole period of two and a half years and a balance of term of two years was, in my opinion, within the appropriate range.

5 Although I would grant leave to appeal the appeal should be dismissed.

6 HIDDEN J: The applicant, Rachel Beryl Doolan, pleaded guilty in the District Court to a charge of robbery in company, an offence under s97(1) of the Crimes Act which carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment of twenty years. She was sentenced to imprisonment for four and a half years, comprising a non-parole period of two and a half years and a balance term of two years. The sentence was directed to date from 3 March 2005, the date of the offence and her arrest. She seeks leave to appeal against that sentence.

Facts

7…

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 Doolan v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Doolan v The Queen [2006] NSWCCA 344
Case: [2006] NSWCCA 344
Decision Date: 8 November 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Doolan v The Queen, the applicant sought leave to appeal against his sentence for a robbery committed in company. The court had to determine whether adequate consideration was given to the applicant's mental health issues during the sentencing process. The primary concern was whether the sentencing judge appropriately weighed the applicant's mental illness in the context of the offence and in determining the appropriate punishment.

The legal issues revolved around the principles of sentencing and whether the judge had adequately considered the mitigating effect of the applicant's mental health condition on the gravity of the crime. It was argued that the sentencing process did not sufficiently account for the impact of the applicant's mental illness, which could have potentially resulted in a more lenient sentence. The court needed to assess whether the sentence imposed was just and whether it reflected the mitigating circumstances of the applicant's mental health.

In examining the case, the court found that the sentencing judge did not adequately consider the extent of the applicant's mental illness and its impact on his culpability. The court held that the sentencing process did not give sufficient weight to the mitigating effect of the applicant's mental health condition. As a result, the court granted the application for leave to appeal, emphasising the need for a more comprehensive assessment of the applicant's mental health during sentencing. The case underscores the importance of ensuring that mental health issues are appropriately factored into the sentencing process to achieve a just outcome.

Orders