R v Hatzimanolis

Case [2021] NSWDC 787


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hatzimanolis [2021] NSWDC 787
Hearing dates: 19 November 2021, 16 December 2021
Date of orders: 16 December 2021
Decision date: 16 December 2021
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Haesler DCJ
Decision:

Contravene AVO: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 9 months.

Wounding with intent to murder his father: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 9 years. Non-parole period of 5 years 5 months.

Catchwords:

CRIME – Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO (Domestic) – wound with intent to murder (DV)

SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – guilty plea - defence of mental illness not put forward - long term schizophrenia - attack on his father - causal relationship between his mental illness and his offending – assessment of moral culpability –victim impact - special circumstances need for offender to be kept in and released to a mental health facility

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007

Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006

Crimes Act 1900

Mental Health Act 2007

Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020

Cases Cited:

Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195; 172 A Crim R 371

DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; (2010) 79 NSWLR 1

Elturk v R [2014] NSWCCA 61

Engert v R (1995) 84 A Crim R 67

Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 5; (2005) 228 CLR 357

McCullough v R [2009] NSWCA 95

Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39

Tepania v R [2018] NSWCC 247

Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14

Category:Sentence
Parties: Alexander Hatzimanolis (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the offender)

Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (for the offender)
Mr M Rollestone (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s): 2020/00365916

SENTENCE – EX TEMPORE REVISED

  1. Schizophrenia is a chronic and severe mental disorder that affects many people. It is characterised by distortions; in thinking, perception, emotions, language, sense of self and behaviour. It is a disease frequently associated with considerable disability and impairment in psychosocial function. It leads to other significant problems, including drug use, homelessness, discrimination and victimisation. People with the disease are often vulnerable but it can also, as the matters presently before the Court indicate, make others in the community vulnerable, particularly those who care for those with a schizophrenic illness.

  2. There is no dispute that Alexander Hatzimanolis has for many years suffered from schizophrenia. It is not in any dispute that since 2015 he has been admitted to psychiatric facilities regularly. He was last discharged on 26 March 2019 after a lengthy stay at Shellharbour Hospital. He was then subject to a Community Treatment Order and managed by a local mental health team. Some of that management appears to have fallen by the wayside during the pandemic.

  3. Although, according to material before me, he had a defence at law available to him because of his mental illness,…

Continue reading R v Hatzimanolis

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Hatzimanolis [2021] NSWDC 787
Case
[2021] NSWDC 787
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Hatzimanolis involved the appellant who was charged with contravening a domestic violence intervention order and wounding his father with intent to murder. The matter was heard and determined in the relevant Australian court. The appellant had a history of long-term schizophrenia, which was a significant factor in the proceedings.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were the causal relationship between the appellant's mental illness and his offending behaviour, the assessment of his moral culpability, and the appropriate sentence taking into account his mental health condition. The court also had to consider the impact on the victim and any special circumstances, such as the need for the appellant to be kept in and released to a mental health facility.

The court found that there was a clear causal relationship between the appellant's schizophrenia and his offending, which influenced his moral culpability. However, the appellant did not put forward a defence of mental illness during the trial. The court balanced these factors against the gravity of the offences and the need for general deterrence. Ultimately, the court sentenced the appellant to a term of imprisonment of 9 months for contravening the AVO and 9 years for the wounding with intent to murder his father, with a non-parole period of 5 years and 5 months.

The court made clear orders regarding the appellant's imprisonment terms, ensuring that appropriate consideration was given to his mental health needs. The final orders mandated the appellant to serve a specific term for each offence, with clear stipulations on the non-parole period for the more serious charge.

Orders

Orders of the court

Contravene AVO: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 9 months.

Wounding with intent to murder his father: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 9 years. Non-parole period of 5 years 5 months.

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.