R v Heath Innis Martin - [2018] NSWDC 388

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Heath Innis Martin [2018] NSWDC 388
Hearing dates: 5 December 2018
Decision date: 07 December 2018
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Mahony SC DCJ
Decision:
Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [59].

Catchwords: Recklessly cause grievous bodily harm.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited: R v Kirkland [2005] NSWCCA 130
R v Lullum (2016) 263 A Crim R 287
Category: Sentence
Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Heath Innis Martin (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
C Todd (Crown)
Solicitors:
M Hempsall (Offender)

File Number(s): 16/345330
Publication restriction: Nil

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender has pleaded guilty to an offence of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm pursuant to s 35(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The Crown has accepted that plea in full answer to an Indictment on which that charge was an alternative to Count 1.
The maximum penalty for the offence is 10 years imprisonment, and there is a Standard Non-Parole Period of 4 years imprisonment.
The offender has also been charged with, and entered pleas of guilty to, three charges on a certificate pursuant to s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, namely:

H62835147/2 – Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm

H62835147/3 – Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm

H62835147/4 – Threaten to destroy or damage other persons property

The sentence hearing

The sentence hearing took place on 5 December 2018. The Crown Sentence Summary became Ex A and it contained an Agreed Statement of Facts, which may be summarised as follows.
On 3 November 2016, the offender was working interstate. While he was away, someone broke into his garage at premises at Lake Tabourie and stole his quad bike. The offender suspected a young person, TW, who apparently had been seen riding it and admitted knowing that it was stolen. The offender reported the matter to police, however, he was dissatisfied with the police response. TW was the 14 year old son of Ms B-J Davis, who was temporarily staying with her mother, Mrs Kay Taylor at Lake Tabourie. The offender and Mrs Taylor were known to each other.
On 17 November 2016, shortly after 7pm, the offender drove to Mrs Taylor’s home. A silver Toyota Corolla was parked in the carport, and a lime green Holden Commodore was parked directly behind it. This vehicle was owned by Ms Davis. The offender parked his vehicle just inside the front boundary. He placed a black petrol container and an oxy-acetylene torch with a yellow gas bottle on the bonnet of his car. Mrs Taylor walked out of her premises and met the offender. He said aggressively, “Get the cunts out here now”. Those facts support sequences 2 and 3 on the s 166 certificate of stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm. Ms Davis and TW came out of the house and an argument ensued over who stole the offender’s quad bike. During that argument, the offender grabbed the container…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Heath Innis Martin and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2018] NSWDC 388
Decision Date: 07 December 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Heath Innis Martin, was charged with recklessly causing grievous bodily harm to the victim, who suffered severe injuries as a result of the appellant’s actions. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia. Martin appealed against his conviction and sentence, arguing that the lower court erred in its application of the law and that the sentence was excessive.

The primary legal issue was whether the lower court had correctly applied the principles of recklessness and grievous bodily harm under the relevant statutory provisions. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the sentence imposed was appropriate and whether there were any errors in the sentencing process that warranted a reduction or modification of the sentence.

The court found that the lower court had correctly applied the principles of recklessness and grievous bodily harm. The evidence demonstrated that the appellant's actions were reckless and resulted in grievous bodily harm to the victim. The court also held that the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range, taking into account the severity of the offence and the need for deterrence and retribution. The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld.

The final orders included confirming the appellant's conviction, maintaining the original sentence, and directing that the appellant serve his term in a full-time custodial setting. The specific details of the sentence and any additional orders were outlined in paragraph [59] of the judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [59].

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Heath Innis Martin [2018] NSWDC 388
Hearing dates:	5 December 2018
Decision date:	07 December 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Mahony SC DCJ
Decision:	Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [59].
Catchwords:	Recklessly cause grievous bodily harm.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	R v Kirkland [2005] NSWCCA 130 R v Lullum (2016) 263 A Crim R 287
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Heath Innis Martin (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: C Todd (Crown) Solicitors: M Hempsall (Offender)
File Number(s):	16/345330
Publication restriction:	Nil