Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]; White JA at [296]; Fagan J at [297]
Decision:
(1) In relation to the applicant’s appeal against conviction, leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed. (2) In relation to the application for leave to appeal against sentence, leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed.
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – murder – trial by judge alone – appeal against conviction – applicant stabbed ex girlfriend – applicant immediately stabbed himself in chest and neck afterwards – evidence of applicant that stabbing accidental – common ground that evidence of applicant should be rejected – applicant also raised defence of substantial impairment – Crown case circumstantial – necessity to consider all circumstances established by evidence – Crown established deceased broke relationship off with applicant and applicant distressed by breakup – only rational inference that applicant intended to kill deceased – substantial impairment – applicant affected by Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder – applicant established abnormality of mind due to underlying condition – failure to establish substantial impairment of capacity to understand events or judge whether actions right or wrong – absence of reliable narrative from applicant – whether impairment of capacity to control himself established by applicant – whether trial judge gave determinative weight to the importance of planning – whether trial judge failed to properly assess the opinions of Dr Nielssen and Dr Furst and adequately explain why he did not accept their opinions – whether error in trial judge’s finding that in the absence of a credible narrative from the applicant as to when he formed the intention to kill and what steps he took to give effect to that intention, the applicant had not discharged the onus on him under s 23A Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – whether guilty verdict unreasonable – trial judge correct to find that applicant had failed to establish substantial impairment of capacity to control himself – failure to make out partial defence of substantial impairment – conviction appeal dismissed – SENTENCE APPEAL – murder – applicant convicted following judge alone trial – applicant rendered himself quadriplegic following murder of his girlfriend – applicant suffering from Borderline Personality Disorder – applicant suffering from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder – contribution of mental state to offending – whether error in sentencing judge’s consideration of the need for general deterrence – whether sentencing judge fettered his discretion when considering extra curial punishment – whether sentencing judge should have taken into account the applicant’s self-inflicted injuries as a mitigating factor – whether his Honour erred in failing to find special circumstances – whether his Honour erred in failing to take into account the applicant’s abnormality of mind and his diminished moral culpability when assessing the objective seriousness of the offending – whether sentence manifestly excessive – application for leave to appeal against sentence…
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 Quinn v R
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Quinn v R [2018] NSWCCA 297
Case
[2018] NSWCCA 297
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Quinn v R, the appellant was convicted of murder following a trial by a judge alone in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant stabbed his ex-girlfriend, after which he stabbed himself in the chest and neck. The appellant claimed the stabbing of his ex-girlfriend was accidental and raised the defence of substantial impairment due to his Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder. The Crown argued that the stabbing was intentional and that the appellant's mental health conditions did not result in a substantial impairment of his capacity to control himself.
The court was required to determine whether the trial judge erred in rejecting the appellant's evidence, whether the appellant established a substantial impairment of his capacity to control himself, and whether the sentencing judge erred in his consideration of the appellant's mental health and self-inflicted injuries. The court found that the appellant's evidence was not credible and that he failed to establish a substantial impairment of his capacity to control himself. The court also found that the sentencing judge did not err in his consideration of the appellant's mental health and self-inflicted injuries, and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive.
The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the application for leave to appeal against sentence was allowed but the appeal was ultimately dismissed. The court found that the trial judge's determination that the appellant intended to kill his ex-girlfriend was supported by the evidence and that the sentencing judge properly considered the appellant's mental health and self-inflicted injuries in determining the sentence. The court also found that the sentencing judge did not err in his consideration of general deterrence and special circumstances. The appellant's conviction and sentence were therefore upheld.