Legal Research
Cases
Guthridge v R

Guthridge v R

Case [2010] VSCA 132 9 June 2010

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

No 714 of 2008

SHAUN GUTHRIDGE
	v
THE QUEEN

---

JUDGES	NEAVE and REDLICH JJA and COGHLAN AJA
WHERE HELD	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING	26 October 2009
DATE OF ORDERS	25 March 2010
DATE OF REASONS FOR JUDGMENT	9 June 2010
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION	[2010] VSCA 132
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM	R v Guthridge (Unreported, County Court of Victoria, Judge Howard, 19 June 2008)

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Conviction – Dangerous driving causing death – Drivers ‘racing’ each other – Acting in concert – Aiding and abetting – Directions as to elements of offence failed to adequately distinguish between culpable driving and dangerous driving causing death – R v De Montero [2009] VSCA 255, applied – Evidence sufficient to support conviction on basis of aiding and abetting – Adequate directions as to modes of liability – Application for leave to appeal granted – Appeal allowed.

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Applicant re-sentenced due to successful appeal against conviction – Same sentences imposed on remaining counts.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal – Substantial portion of non-parole period served – Verdict of acquittal entered.

---

APPEARANCES:

Counsel

Solicitors

For the Applicant

Mr P J Morrissey SC

Leanne Warren & Associates

For the Crown

Mr T Gyorffy with
Mr B L Sonnet

Mr C Hyland, Solicitor for

Public Prosecutions

NEAVE JA
REDLICH JA
COGHLAN AJA:

The applicant, Shaun Ian Guthridge was presented on counts of culpable driving (count 1), failing to stop a vehicle after an accident (count 2) and failing to render assistance after an accident (count 3). He was convicted by a jury on the alternative offence to count 1 (dangerous driving causing death) and on the other two counts. After hearing a plea in mitigation of sentence, the judge sentenced him as follows:

Count

Offence

Term

Cumulation

Alternative to count 1

Dangerous driving causing death

3 years’ imprisonment

2

Failing to stop vehicle after accident

12 months’ imprisonment

6 months on count 1

3

Failing to render assistance after accident

12 months’ imprisonment

This amounted to a total effective sentence of 3 years and 6 months’ imprisonment. His Honour ordered a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months and declared that the applicant had spent 56 days in pre-sentence detention.

The applicant sought leave to appeal against his conviction for dangerous driving causing death and against his sentence. On 25 March 2010 the Court of Appeal ordered that leave to appeal be granted and the conviction for dangerous driving causing death be quashed. Given that the applicant had served about approximately 1 year and 11 months in custody, the Court ordered that a verdict of acquittal on that count be entered.[1] The orders cancelling the applicant’s licences and permits to drive and disqualifying the applicant from obtaining any such licence and permit for a period of four years under s 61(1) of the Road Safety Act1986 were confirmed.[2] The applicant was re-sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment on each of counts 2…

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 Guthridge v R

Details

AGLC: Guthridge v R [2010] VSCA 132
Case: [2010] VSCA 132
Decision Date: 9 June 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Guthridge, was convicted of dangerous driving causing death in the County Court of Victoria. Guthridge and another driver were travelling at high speed on a public road, racing each other. The other driver lost control of his vehicle and collided with a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction, resulting in the death of the driver of that vehicle. Guthridge was convicted of dangerous driving causing death and other related offences in the County Court. Guthridge appealed against his conviction on the basis that the trial judge failed to adequately distinguish between culpable driving and dangerous driving causing death, and that the directions as to the elements of the offence were insufficient. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge’s directions as to the elements of the offence were inadequate and that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction on the basis of aiding and abetting. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction. The Crown applied for leave to appeal, which was granted. On appeal, the Crown argued that the trial judge’s directions as to the elements of the offence were adequate, and that the evidence did not support a conviction on the basis of aiding and abetting. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge’s directions as to the elements of the offence were inadequate, and that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction on the basis of aiding and abetting. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction. Guthridge was re-sentenced on the remaining counts, with the same sentences being imposed. The Court of Appeal noted that a substantial portion of the non-parole period had been served, and that a verdict of acquittal had been entered on the count of dangerous driving causing death. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction.

Orders