Brereton JA at [1] N Adams J at [2] Lonergan J at [3]
Decision:
(1) The appeal is allowed.
(2) The convictions of the appellant in the District Court on 14 July 2020 for the offences of dangerous driving causing death contrary to s 52A(1)(c) of the Crimes Act 1990 (NSW) and dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm contrary to s 52A(3)(c) of the Crimes Act 1990 (NSW) and the sentence imposed on 20 September 2020 are quashed.
(4) Discharge the appellant on the condition that he comply with all requirements of his Community Treatment Order and take medication prescribed to him by his treating psychiatrist.
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – conviction appeal – appeal from decision of the District Court – judge alone trial – whether trial judge’s conduct gave rise to procedural unfairness or an apprehension of bias causing a miscarriage of justice – whether wrong test applied in determining whether appellant had established that he was mentally ill at the time of the alleged offence – whether a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible should be entered pursuant to s 7(4) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 – appeal allowed – special verdicts entered
[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 Masters v R
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Masters v R [2022] NSWCCA 228
Case
[2022] NSWCCA 228
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Masters v R involved an appeal from a decision of the District Court of New South Wales. The appellant, Masters, had been convicted by a judge alone of various criminal offences. The appeal centred on the contention that the trial judge’s conduct had given rise to procedural unfairness or an apprehension of bias, which led to a miscarriage of justice. A further issue was whether the trial judge had applied the correct legal test in determining whether Masters was mentally ill at the time of the alleged offence. The appellant argued that a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible should have been entered under section 7(4) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912.
The court examined the conduct of the trial judge to assess whether there had been any procedural unfairness or apprehension of bias that could have tainted the trial. It was determined that the trial judge's conduct did not amount to procedural unfairness or bias. The court then turned to the question of whether the trial judge had applied the correct legal test in determining the appellant's mental state at the time of the alleged offence. It was held that the trial judge had applied the wrong test in this respect. Given this error, the court concluded that a miscarriage of justice had occurred. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible was entered pursuant to section 7(4) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912.