Court of Criminal Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Pearce v R [2022] NSWCCA 68 Hearing dates: 1 February 2022 Date of orders: 1 April 2022 Decision date: 01 April 2022 Before: Beech-Jones CJ at CL at [1]; Harrison J at [2]; Fagan J at [3] Decision: (1) Extend time for the filing of the application for leave to appeal sufficient to allow the application to proceed on its merits;
(2) Grant leave to appeal;
(3) In lieu of the period of automatic disqualification prescribed under s 205(2)(d)(i) of the Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), order pursuant s 205(2)(d)(ii) of that Act that the applicant is disqualified from holding a driver licence for a period of 1 year and 4 months, commencing on 23 December 2020 and expiring on 22 April 2022; and
(4) Otherwise dismiss the appeal.
Catchwords: CRIME — appeals — appeal against sentence — aggravated dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm — victim suffered a severe brain injury — where vehicle was travelling in excess of 200km/h with unrestrained passenger — where offending assessed as being “well above the mid-range” — whether the sentencing judge erred in assessment of objective seriousness — no error — whether the sentencing judge erred in the assessment of impact on the victim — limited evidence put before the sentencing judge — no error — term of imprisonment not manifestly excessive — automatic disqualification — failure to exercise jurisdiction with respect to variation of automatic period
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW)
Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Application by the Attorney General (No. 3 of 2002) [2004] NSWCCA 303
Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54
Lehn v R (2016) 93 NSWLR 205; [2016] NSWCCA 255
McGonigle v R [2020] NSWCCA 84
Obeid v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 155; [2017] NSWCCA 221
Priovolidis v R [2016] NSWCCA 201
R v Daetz; R v Wilson [2003] NSWCCA 216; (2003) 139 A Crim R 398
R v Jurisic (1998) 45 NSWLR 209
R v Tuhakaraina [2016] NSWCCA 81
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Aaron Pearce - applicant
Regina - respondentRepresentation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
T Hammond - applicant
M Millward - respondent
Cruz Clowry Law Group Pty Ltd - applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions - respondent
File Number(s): 2016/121830 Publication restriction: No Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- District Court
- Jurisdiction:
- Criminal
- Date of Decision:
- 24 March 2017
- Before:
- McLennan SC DCJ
- File Number(s):
- 2016/121830
Judgment
-
BEECH-JONES CJ at CL: I have read the judgment of Fagan J. Subject to what follows I agree with his Honour including his Honour’s finding that the sentencing judge erred in failing to…
Continue reading Pearce v The The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Pearce v The The Queen [2022] NSWCCA 68
- Case
- [2022] NSWCCA 68
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court of Appeal held that the sentencing judge had correctly assessed the objective seriousness of the offending and the impact on the victim. The Court noted that there was limited evidence put before the sentencing judge about the impact on the victim, but that did not amount to an error. The Court also held that the term of imprisonment was not manifestly excessive and that the sentencing judge did not err in failing to exercise the jurisdiction to vary the period of the automatic disqualification from driving. The appeal was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.