PARSONS -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 407
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2000] WASCA 407 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:124/2000 | 14 SEPTEMBER 2000 | |
| Coram: | PIDGEON J WALLWORK J WHEELER J | 20/12/00 | |
| 11 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed Sentence reduced to a term of 2 years | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | COREY LAWRENCE PARSONS THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal Law & Procedure Sentencing Dangerous driving causing death 18 year old offender Utility overturned in an area of road works Culpable driving for a considerable distance earlier Remorse shown 3 year sentence reduced to 2 years Turns on own facts |
Legislation: | Road Traffic Act |
Case References: | Bropho v R, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940197; 14 April 1994 Colbung v R [1999] WASCA 138 R v White [2000] WASCA 118 Smith v The Queen [1976] WAR 97 Ainsworth v D (A Child) (1992) 7 WAR 102 Atholwood v The Queen (1999) 109 A Crim R 465 Fleming v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970005; 17 January 1997 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 MacKereth v The Queen (1991) 12 MVR 463 Pinkstone v The Queen [2000] WASCA 228 Punch v The Queen (1993) 9 WAR 486 R v Bowers (1996) 23 MVR 489 R v Guilfoyle [1973] 2 All ER 844 R v Jurisic (1998) 101 A Crim R 259 R v Sheppard (1995) 77 A Crim R 139 R v Stebbings (1990) 4 WAR 538 R v Tait (1979) 46 FLR 386 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : PARSONS -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 407 CORAM : PIDGEON J
- WALLWORK J
WHEELER J
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal Law & Procedure - Sentencing - Dangerous driving causing death - 18 year old offender - Utility overturned in an area of road works - Culpable driving for a considerable distance earlier - Remorse shown - 3 year sentence reduced to 2 years - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Road Traffic Act
Result:
Appeal allowed
Sentence reduced to a term of 2 years
(Page 2)
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Mr R A Mazza
Respondent : Mr R E Cock QC & Mr A S Derrick
Solicitors:
Applicant : Mazza & Mazza
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Bropho v R, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 940197; 14 April 1994
Colbung v R [1999] WASCA 138
R v White [2000] WASCA 118
Smith v The Queen [1976] WAR 97
Case(s) also cited:
Ainsworth v D (A Child) (1992) 7 WAR 102
Atholwood v The Queen (1999) 109 A Crim R 465
Fleming v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970005; 17 January 1997
Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195…
Continue reading Parsons v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Parsons v The Queen [2000] WASCA 407
- Case
- [2000] WASCA 407
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appeal before the court involved the defendant, Parsons, who was convicted of dangerous driving causing death. The incident involved the overturning of a utility vehicle in an area of road works, resulting in the death of a passenger. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia. Parsons, an 18-year-old, had been driving irresponsibly for a significant distance prior to the fatal accident. He showed remorse for his actions, which was taken into consideration during sentencing. The initial sentence of three years was appealed on the grounds that it was excessive, and the appeal was subsequently allowed.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the original sentence was appropriate given the circumstances of the case. The court had to consider the nature and severity of the offence, the culpability of the offender, and the mitigating factors, such as the defendant's age and expression of remorse. The court also needed to weigh these factors against the principle of deterrence and the need to protect the community from such reckless behaviour. The appeal hinged on the unique facts of the case, including the extensive period of culpable driving before the fatal incident and the defendant's remorse.
In reducing the sentence from three years to two, the court emphasised the importance of tailoring sentences to the specific circumstances of each case. The court acknowledged the gravity of the offence but considered the mitigating factors and the overall context. The court recognised the defendant's remorse as a significant factor that warranted a reduced sentence. The decision reflected a balanced approach that considered both the need for punishment and the potential for rehabilitation. The court's reasoning was grounded in the principle that sentences should reflect the individual circumstances of the offender and the offence, while also serving the broader goals of the criminal justice system.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the original sentence was appropriate given the circumstances of the case. The court had to consider the nature and severity of the offence, the culpability of the offender, and the mitigating factors, such as the defendant's age and expression of remorse. The court also needed to weigh these factors against the principle of deterrence and the need to protect the community from such reckless behaviour. The appeal hinged on the unique facts of the case, including the extensive period of culpable driving before the fatal incident and the defendant's remorse.
In reducing the sentence from three years to two, the court emphasised the importance of tailoring sentences to the specific circumstances of each case. The court acknowledged the gravity of the offence but considered the mitigating factors and the overall context. The court recognised the defendant's remorse as a significant factor that warranted a reduced sentence. The decision reflected a balanced approach that considered both the need for punishment and the potential for rehabilitation. The court's reasoning was grounded in the principle that sentences should reflect the individual circumstances of the offender and the offence, while also serving the broader goals of the criminal justice system.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed
Sentence reduced to a term of 2 years
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.