R v Adrian Bennet Pipitone - [2014] ACTSC 318

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Adrian Bennet Pipitone
Citation:	[2014] ACTSC 318
Hearing Date(s):	7, 17 February 2014, 3 April 2014, 14 May 2014, 27 August 2014
DecisionDate:	27 August 2014
Before:	Refshauge J
Decision:	1. Adrian Bennet Pipitone be convicted of damaging property on 17 June 2013. 2. Adrian Bennet Pipitone be required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offenders good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of twelve months, with the following conditions: (a) a probation condition that he be subject to supervision of the Director‑General, or a person delegated by her, for twelve months, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him, such directions to be made only in consultation with the Public Advocate in respect of treatment and counselling for drug and alcohol use, treatment and counselling for his mental illness, including psychoeducation about his schizophrenic disorder and vocational or other training; and (b) that he consent to any provider of treatment and counselling services for drug and alcohol use that he may be directed to access and ACT Mental Health Services providing to the Public Advocate and the person delegated to supervise him any information as to his compliance with and progress on treatment and counselling that they may provide.
Category:	Principal Judgment
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Judgment and Punishment – Sentencing Damaging property – Mental illness involved in offender’s criminality – Mental illness reduced offender’s moral culpability as distinct from his legal culpability
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), s 403
Cases Cited:	Halden v The Queen (1983) 9 A Crim R 30 R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Adrian Bennet Pipitone (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel Mr D Sahu Khan (Crown) Mr J De Bruin (Offender)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid (ACT) (Offender)
File Number(s):	SCC 110 of 2013

Refshauge J:

Adrian Bennet Pipitone has been a consumer of Mental Health Services for many years. He has a diagnosis of chronic paranoid schizophrenia, which has led him into trouble in various ways in the past. His mental health is exacerbated by his illicit drug use, which has become a drug dependence and which may be currently a greater cause of trouble to him and the community.

The facts

On 4 March 2013, Mr Pipitone was admitted to the Brian Hennessey Rehabilitation Centre. It was while there that the offence to which he has now pleaded guilty was committed.

On 17 June 2013, he had just finished a visit with his mother without incident when he returned to his room but, in doing so, along the main corridor used his feet to kick the internal plaster wall. Two large holes resulted in the plaster wall and pieces of broken plaster landed on the floor. He was told to calm down and go to his room, but he was yelling and screaming…

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 R v Adrian Bennet Pipitone

Details

AGLC: R v Adrian Bennet Pipitone [2014] ACTSC 318
Case: [2014] ACTSC 318
Decision Date: 27 August 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Adrian Bennet Pipitone was convicted of damaging property on 17 June 2013, and the matter was heard in the Magistrates Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The defendant, who suffers from mental illness, was found to have committed the offence while under the influence of his condition. The primary legal issue before the court was whether Pipitone's mental illness should be considered in determining his moral culpability for the crime, as opposed to his legal culpability.

The court considered the nature of Pipitone's mental illness, which included drug and alcohol use, and its impact on his actions during the incident. The defendant's legal team argued that his mental illness reduced his moral culpability, while the prosecution maintained that legal culpability should not be affected by his mental state. The court concluded that Pipitone's mental illness did indeed reduce his moral culpability for the offence, although it did not affect his legal culpability. The court emphasised the importance of distinguishing between the two forms of culpability when considering the appropriate sentence for the defendant.

The court ordered that Pipitone be convicted of damaging property on 17 June 2013, and sentenced him to a period of supervision and treatment under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT). The defendant was required to sign an undertaking to comply with his good behaviour obligations for a period of twelve months. This included being subject to supervision by the Director-General or a person delegated by her, and obeying all reasonable directions related to treatment and counselling for drug and alcohol use, mental illness, and vocational or other training. The court also required Pipitone to consent to any providers of treatment and counselling services for drug and alcohol use that he may be directed to access and ACT Mental Health Services providing to the Public Advocate and the person delegated to supervise him any information as to his compliance with and progress on treatment and counselling that they may provide.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Adrian Bennet Pipitone be convicted of damaging property on 17 June 2013.

2. Adrian Bennet Pipitone be required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offenders good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of twelve months, with the following conditions:

(a) a probation condition that he be subject to supervision of the Director‑General, or a person delegated by her, for twelve months, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him, such directions to be made only in consultation with the Public Advocate in respect of treatment and counselling for drug and alcohol use, treatment and counselling for his mental illness, including psychoeducation about his schizophrenic disorder and vocational or other training; and

(b) that he consent to any provider of treatment and counselling services for drug and alcohol use that he may be directed to access and ACT Mental Health Services providing to the Public Advocate and the person delegated to supervise him any information as to his compliance with and progress on treatment and counselling that they may provide.

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.