R v Postolovski

The case of *R v Postolovski* concerned an appeal against the head sentence and non-parole period imposed by a judge of the Supreme Court for attempted murder and property damage. The appellant, who was intoxicated, attacked his wife with a kitchen knife during a domestic argument, causing her several stab wounds. The knife broke, and the appellant pursued his wife with a second knife, damaging a neighbour's car as she sought refuge inside. The sentencing judge noted the offending was the culmination of years of alcohol-fuelled domestic violence.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentencing judge erred in categorising the offence as being at the higher end of the sentencing scale, and consequently, whether the head sentence of 14 years imprisonment (reduced to nine years and eight months for an early guilty plea) and the non-parole period of six years were manifestly excessive. The appellant argued that the offence lacked premeditation, the injuries were not immediately life-threatening, and his aggression had not extended beyond the marital relationship, suggesting he was being punished for unconvicted domestic violence.

The court considered the appellant's personal circumstances, including his status as a first offender, good work record, mental health issues at the time of the offence, and the sentencing judge's assessment that he was unlikely to reoffend and was contrite. These mitigating factors were weighed against the seriousness of the attack within the context of a history of domestic violence. The court found that the sentencing judge had appropriately balanced these competing considerations.

Ultimately, the court concluded that the sentencing judge did not err in fixing the head sentence and the non-parole period. Permission to appeal against the head sentence was refused, and the appeal against the non-parole period was dismissed.