Legal Research
Cases
R v Greene

R v Greene

Case [2001] NSWCCA 258 29 June 2001

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: Regina v Greene [2001] NSWCCA 258

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60047/01

HEARING DATE(S): 29/06/01

JUDGMENT DATE:
29 June 2001

PARTIES :

Regina v Trevor Clive Greene

JUDGMENT OF: Wood CJ at CL at 21; Howie J at 1

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 99/51/0275

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL
OFFICER : Ducker DCJ

COUNSEL : M.C. Grogan - Crown
C.B. Craigie - Applicant

SOLICITORS: S.E. O'Connor - Crown
D.J. Humphreys - applicant

CATCHWORDS: Criminal Law - Sentence - Use offensive weapon with intent to inflict gbh - importance of general deterrence in domestic violence offences

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 - s 33B(a)

CASES CITED:
R v Glen (NSWCCA, 19 December 1994)
Nekuda (1989) 39 A Crim R 5

DECISION: Application for leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL

60047/01

WOOD CJ AT CL
HOWIE J
FRIDAY 29 JUNE 2001

REGINA v TREVOR CLIVE GREENE

JUDGMENT

1 HOWIE J: The applicant Trevor Clive Greene seeks leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon him by Judge Ducker on 15 December 2000 to a charge of using an offensive weapon with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm contrary to the provisions of s 33B(a) of the Crimes Act. The charge to which the applicant pleaded guilty was an alternative to a count which alleged the applicant had attempted to murder the victim. The Crown accepted the plea to the less serious offence in full discharge of the indictment. The maximum penalty for the offence is imprisonment for 12 years.

2 The applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years with a non-parole period of 2 years. The sentences were backdated to commence on 30 October 2000 in order to give the applicant credit for the period served in custody before he was released to bail. The non-parole period specified is to expire on 29 October 2002, the date upon which the applicant is eligible to be released to parole.

3 The factual basis upon which Judge Ducker had to sentence the applicant was contained in an agreed statement of facts. None of the statements of witnesses was placed before him. The facts can be summarised briefly. The victim of the offence then known as Ms Smidt, and the applicant had been in a relationship for about 5 years and lived together as man and wife since July 1998. On the evening of 17 July 1999, they went together to licensed premises in Ballina. They left those premises after having consumed a quantity of alcohol at about 9.30pm and hired a taxi. The two began to argue as to whether they should proceed on to the RSL Club. Ms Smidt’s wishes prevailed and they went home. However, they continued to argue both before leaving home to go to the RSL club and on their return about an hour later.

4 Ms Smidt went to bed and sometime later awoke to find the applicant standing alongside her. He twice lifted the bed up tipping…

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 Greene

Details

AGLC: R v Greene [2001] NSWCCA 258
Case: [2001] NSWCCA 258
Decision Date: 29 June 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Greene involved the defendant, Greene, who was charged with using an offensive weapon with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm (GBH) in a domestic violence context. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The victim in this case was Greene's former partner, with whom he had a tumultuous relationship characterised by repeated incidents of domestic violence. The dispute centred around a specific incident where Greene used a knife against the victim, causing serious injury.

The legal issues before the court were twofold. Firstly, it was necessary to determine the appropriate sentencing principles applicable to domestic violence offences involving the use of a weapon. Secondly, the court had to consider the role of general deterrence in sentencing for such offences. The prosecution argued for a sentence that reflected the gravity of the crime and its impact on the victim, while also emphasising the need to deter future acts of domestic violence. The defence, on the other hand, sought a more lenient sentence, highlighting Greene's background and personal circumstances, including his history of mental health issues.

The court, in delivering its judgment, recognised the severe nature of the offence and the critical importance of general deterrence in cases of domestic violence. It held that while individual circumstances of the offender must be considered, the overarching objective of sentencing in such cases is to protect the community and deter future acts of violence. The court concluded that a custodial sentence was necessary to adequately address these objectives. It imposed a term of imprisonment, accompanied by orders for rehabilitation and counselling to address Greene's underlying issues. The final orders included a non-parole period to ensure public safety and a requirement for Greene to participate in a domestic violence intervention program.

Orders