R v Crane

Case [2023] NSWDC 315


District Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Crane [2023] NSWDC 315
Hearing dates: 11 August 2023
Date of orders: 16 August 2023
Decision date: 16 August 2023
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Montgomery DCJ
Decision:

See [49]

Catchwords:

CRIME – Sentence – s 52A(1) Drive at speed that exceeded 45km/h more than speed limit – Very high intoxication – Dangerous driving occasioning death – Circumstances of aggravation – Plea of guilty

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 52A

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 9

Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW)

Road Rules 2014 (NSW), r 287

Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), ss 111, 117

Cases Cited:

Norouzi v R [2020] NSWCCA 237

R v Meakin [2019] NSWSC 1555

R v Munro [2019] NSWDC 743

R v Polutele [2020] NSWDC 33

R v Whyte (2002) 55 NSWLR 252; [2002] NSWCCA 343

SBF v R [2009] NSWCCA 231

Category:Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Peter Stephen Crane (Offender)
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr B Page (Crown)
Mr A Conwell (Offender)

Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions NSW (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Offender)
File Number(s): 2022/00039789

Judgment

  1. The offender, who was born on 18 August 1982, entered a plea of guilty at the first available opportunity for the offence under s 52A(2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) committed on 19 January 2022. The maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment. There is no standard non-parole period. It is agreed that he is entitled to a discount on sentence of 25%.

  2. The parties agreed that the element of aggravation (s 52A(7) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)) is that at the time of collision the offender was driving at a speed in excess of 45km/h above the posted limit but that his intoxication is an aggravating circumstance for consideration in the synthesis of sentencing.

  3. At the sentencing hearing on 11 August 2023 the Crown withdrew the following sequence matters:

  • H86570264/2: negligent drive occasioning death, s 117(1)(a) Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW); and

  • H86570264/3: drive motor vehicle with illicit drug present in blood, s 111(1)(a) Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW).

  1. At the time of the offence, Mr Crane was 39 years of age. He suffered significant injuries in the motor vehicle collision, and Ms Bonnie Berrell (DOB: 11/07/1984) suffered injuries resulting in her death. He was admitted to hospital. On 10 February 2020, on his release from hospital, the offender was arrested and taken into police custody. At the time of this judgment, he will have spent 1 year, 6 months and 6 days (552 days) in custody.

  2. The offending occurred whilst the offender was subject to a Community Corrections Order (CCO) made 23 June 2021, for 2 years, concluding 22 June 2023.

  3. The offender has an extensive criminal antecedent history over the course of which he has repeatedly been dealt with by way of recognisances, disqualifications from driving, suspensions of licence and only on one occasion, periodic incarceration.

  4. The Crown relies on the offender’s extensive traffic record but, in particular, highlights the…

Continue reading R v Crane

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Crane [2023] NSWDC 315
Case
[2023] NSWDC 315
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Crown versus Crane, the accused was charged with a serious criminal offence, having driven at a speed exceeding the limit by more than 45km/h, which resulted in a fatal accident. The case was heard in the County Court of Victoria. The accused had pleaded guilty to the charge of dangerous driving occasioning death under section 52A(1) of the relevant statute, which carried a significant penalty. The court had to consider the aggravating circumstances of the case, including the accused's level of intoxication at the time of the incident.

The court faced the task of determining an appropriate sentence, taking into account the nature and circumstances of the offence, the plea of guilty, and the degree of intoxication. The legal issues centred on the application of section 52A(1) and the extent to which the circumstances of the case warranted a more severe penalty. The court needed to weigh the aggravating factors against the mitigating ones to arrive at a just outcome.

After considering the evidence presented and the submissions made by both parties, the court determined that the case warranted a custodial sentence due to the severity of the offence and the level of intoxication. The court emphasised the need to deter such conduct and to uphold public safety. The sentence imposed reflected the gravity of the offence and the harm caused. The court ordered the accused to serve a term of imprisonment, along with other conditions as specified in the final orders.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [49]

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.