R v Hile - [1999] QCA 17

99.17

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P PINCUS JA McPHERSON JA

CA No 341 of 1998
THE QUEEN
v.

DAMIEN WILLIAM HILE

Applicant

BRISBANE
..DATE 05/02/99
050299 T3/JB M/T COA5/99
THE PRESIDENT: The applicant pleaded guilty to manslaughter
in the Supreme Court, Brisbane, on 3 August 1998. He was
sentenced to six years' imprisonment with a recommendation for
parole after two and a half years.

The facts are as follows. The applicant had a long history of substance abuse and on 13 August 1997 was sharing a residence with the deceased, Kerry Anne Pascoe, who was 42 years old, and some other women. The deceased was not a regular user of heroin and this occasion was either her first or second time to have taken the drug. She had recently been discharged from a psychiatric hospital where she was treated for depression and alcohol and substance abuse.

The applicant and the deceased met whilst they were psychiatric patients. The deceased was an abuser of alcohol, prescribed drugs and of cannabis and the applicant was aware of that history. The applicant had obtained $150 worth of heroin which he knew had a very high purity of between 86 and 90 per cent. He mixed up four shots and administered one to himself. Two other women administered shots to themselves and the applicant injected the deceased in her foot at her request.

The applicant knew the deceased was an irregular user of heroin. Before he administered the dose, another woman present said to the deceased words to the effect, "You don't want to end up in a life like mine addicted to heroin. It's the beginning of the end." Another woman present seemed to 050299 T3/JB M/T COA5/99

encourage the deceased to have the heroin and it was finally agreed by all that she would take the dose in the manner that it was administered.

Shortly after the injection the deceased began to convulse and the applicant, who held a St John's Ambulance first aid certificate, administered CPR whilst another woman called the ambulance. The deceased was taken to hospital, was comatosed, and died six days later.

The applicant originally told ambulance officers the deceased's heroin shot was self-administered but later confessed to an acquaintance who informed police. The applicant at first denied to police that he injected the deceased, but when confronted with the statement of another witness, made full admissions. He then cooperated fully with police and pleaded guilty by way of an ex officio indictment. Submissions by defence counsel and the psychiatric report tendered below demonstrate the applicant was genuinely remorseful.

The applicant had a significant criminal history, mostly drug- related, with some relatively minor property offences. He had had the benefit of probation and other non-custodial orders in the past and had been sentenced to comparatively short terms of imprisonment.

In 1988 he was convicted of the offence of assault occasioning
bodily harm in the Toowoomba Magistrates Court and was
050299 T3/JB M/T COA5/99
sentenced to six months' imprisonment…

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 Hile

Details

AGLC: R v Hile [1999] QCA 17
Case: [1999] QCA 17
Decision Date: 5/02/1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Hile, the applicant, Damien William Hile, appealed against his sentence for manslaughter imposed by the Supreme Court of Brisbane. Hile had pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of Kerry Anne Pascoe, who died from a heroin overdose administered by Hile. The Court of Appeal considered the legal issues surrounding the appropriateness of the sentence imposed on Hile, taking into account his criminal history, the nature of the offence, and the circumstances surrounding the death of Pascoe.

The court examined the legal principles relevant to sentencing for manslaughter, noting the wide range of sentences that could be imposed depending on the facts of each case. The court highlighted the importance of considering the accused's intention, the foreseeability of death, and the nature of the act that led to the death. The court also considered the sentencing remarks made by the trial judge and the psychiatric report prepared by Dr. Paul White, which indicated that Hile's actions were based on a tragic miscalculation.

The Court of Appeal concluded that while the sentence imposed by the trial judge was towards the top end of the appropriate range, it was not manifestly excessive. The court dismissed the appeal, noting that the sentence reflected the seriousness of the offence and the need to deter the use of dangerous drugs. The judges acknowledged the mitigating factors, such as Hile's genuine remorse and his plea of guilty, but also emphasized the gravity of the act of injecting a prohibited and dangerous substance into an inexperienced user.

The final order of the Court of Appeal was that the application for leave to appeal was refused.

Orders