R v Reeves - [1999] NSWCCA 269

CITATION: Regina v REEVES [1999] NSWCCA 269

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60075/98

HEARING DATE(S): 2 July 1999

JUDGMENT DATE:
2 July 1999

PARTIES :

The Crown
Belinda Paula Anne Reeves

JUDGMENT OF: Newman J at 1; Bell J at 36

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 97/21/1215

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Taylor DCJ

COUNSEL: D N Howard (Crown)
S R Norrish QC (Appl)

SOLICITORS: C K Smith (Crown)
T A Murphy (Appl)

CATCHWORDS:

CASES CITED:
R v Jurisic (1998) 45 NSWLR 209

DECISION: Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL

60075/98

NEWMAN J
BELL J

FRIDAY, 2 JULY 1999

REGINA v Belinda Paula Anne REEVES

JUDGMENT

1    NEWMAN J: This is an application for leave to appeal from a sentence imposed upon the applicant by his Honour Judge Taylor at Penrith District Court on 13 February 1998. Before his Honour the applicant had pleaded guilty to a number of charges arising from a fatal motor accident which took place on 26 April 1997 at Blaxland.
2 She was charged on indictment with three counts. The first count was a charge of aggravated dangerous driving occasioning death contrary to s 52A(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The Act prescribed at the time the maximum penalty of fourteen years imprisonment for that offence.
3 She was also charged with two further counts under s 52A(4) of the Crimes Act, namely aggravated dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm. The maximum penalty prescribed by the Crimes Act for that offence is eleven years imprisonment.
4    In the event his Honour, dealing with the matter on the basis of totality, imposed a minimum term of two years and six months and an additional term of two years and six months. That was in relation to the most serious charge of aggravated dangerous driving occasioning death.
5    He fixed terms of eighteen months and twelve months in respect of the second and third counts and, dealing as he was with the matter on the basis of totality, effectively fixed those terms for counts 2 and 3 to be served concurrently. He also disqualified the applicant from driving for a period of three years.
6    There were three counts on the indictment, because there were three victims of the accident. The victim of the first count, aggravated dangerous driving causing death, was a seventeen-year-old girl, Alicia Snaith.
7    The two persons involved in the second and third counts were a girl called Mia Christiansen, who was a fellow pedestrian with Alicia Snaith when the incident occurred. The third victim was a Mr Ricky Randell, who was a passenger in the applicant's car.
8    Alicia Snaith, of course, was killed in the accident. Mia Christiansen suffered very serious injuries involving an open fracture of the right tibia and she received appropriate but extensive surgical treatment and has been diagnosed as suffering at least mild post traumatic stress disorder for the rest of her life.
9    Ricky Randell suffered a fracture of the right ankle…

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 Reeves

Details

AGLC: R v Reeves [1999] NSWCCA 269
Case: [1999] NSWCCA 269
Decision Date: 2 July 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Belinda Paula Anne Reeves was convicted in the Penrith District Court of dangerous driving causing death and grievous bodily harm, and she sought leave to appeal against her sentence. The Court of Criminal Appeal considered the appeal and found that the sentence imposed by the District Court was appropriate. The appellant had driven while intoxicated and on medication, which she knew could adversely interact, causing her to lose control of her vehicle and strike pedestrians, resulting in one death and severe injuries to two others. The appellant had a history of psychiatric conditions and had been warned not to mix alcohol with her medication. The Court held that the sentence was within the appropriate range considering the seriousness of the crime and the aggravating factors present, such as the extent of injuries and the appellant's awareness of the dangers of mixing alcohol and medication. The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld.

Orders