R v Parisi

The Court of Criminal Appeal heard an appeal against sentence from the appellant, Parisi, who had pleaded guilty to various charges including damaging property, breaching a domestic violence restraining order, threatening life, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The appellant's wife was the victim of each of the offences. The District Court judge imposed a sentence of three years and two months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months, discounting the penalty by about 20% due to the appellant's pleas of guilty, contrition, and remorse. The appellant appealed against the sentence, arguing that it was manifestly excessive, and that the sentencing judge failed to give adequate weight to the appellant's rehabilitation efforts and made an inadequate allowance for the restrictions imposed on him when released on bail. The appellant also argued that the judge erred in the exercise of his discretion in not suspending the order for imprisonment.

The Court of Criminal Appeal considered the legal issues raised on appeal, including whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and whether the sentencing judge failed to give adequate weight to the appellant's rehabilitation efforts and made an inadequate allowance for the restrictions imposed on him when released on bail. The Court also considered whether the judge erred in the exercise of his discretion in not suspending the order for imprisonment. The Court found that the appellant's conduct was extremely serious, consisting of three episodes of violent behaviour in a domestic situation. The Court considered that the appellant's conduct took place in breach of a domestic violence restraining order, which is an aggravating factor. The Court concluded that this was not an appropriate case for suspension of sentence. The Court also found that the sentence imposed by the District Court judge was manifestly excessive. The Court considered that the appellant should be given credit for the six weeks imprisonment served by him prior to the date of sentence, as well as an allowance for the period subsequently spent on home detention bail. The Court considered that the appropriate sentence was two years and nine months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of nine months.

The Court of Criminal Appeal allowed the appeal and in lieu of the sentence previously imposed, sentenced the appellant to be imprisoned for a period of two years and nine months with a non-parole period of nine months. The sentence and the non-parole period will commence from the date the appellant was taken into custody. The Court of Criminal Appeal also noted that the District Court judge had erred in his calculation of the maximum penalty for the property damage offences. The Court considered it necessary to set aside the sentence imposed by the District Court judge and exercise the sentencing discretion afresh.