R v Scott, Michael Vincent - [2018] NSWDC 290

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v SCOTT, Michael Vincent [2018] NSWDC 290
Hearing dates: 23 February 2018
Decision date: 27 April 2018
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:
Full time imprisonment. Full details at [50]-[52]

Catchwords: CRIME – Sentence – intending to pervert the course of justice – note to witness by the accused on trial for murder intercepted – opportunistic – totality – special circumstances – difficulty of sentencing for lesser offence after sentence for murder
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Evidence Act 1995
Cases Cited: Church v R [2012] NSWCCA 149
Einfeld v R [2008] NSWCCA 243
Hammoud v R [2000] NSWCCA 540
Marinellis v R [2006] NSWCCA 82
Mill v R (1988) 166 CLR 59
Pearce v R (1998) 194 CLR 610
R v Giang [2001] NSWCCA 276
R v King [2011] NSWCCA 274
R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 44
Scott v R [2017] NSWCCA 296
Taouk (1992) 65 A Crim R 387
Taylor v R [2007] NSWCCA 99
Thomson and Houlton v R (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Michael Vincent Scott
Representation: Solicitors:
Ms Gauld (Crown)
Mr Murray (Offender)

File Number(s): 2015/00122115
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: Michael Vincent Scott appears today for sentence having today adhered to his plea of guilty to a charge that he, on the 24th day of March 2015 at Darlinghurst in the State of New South Wales, did an act to wit pass a handwritten note to Crown witness Kaila Louise Houston intending to pervert the course of justice. That adherence to his plea of guilty today followed upon a committal for sentence from the Local Court as far back as 31 October 2015.
It seems to me in the context of the matters I am about to outline here that he has pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity and thus he will receive a discount of 25% upon the otherwise appropriate sentence required for this particular offence, to recognise the utilitarian benefit of the plea of guilty that he entered in accordance with the guideline judgment of Thomson and Houlton v R from 1999.
This is an offence contrary to s 319 Crimes Act 1900. It carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment and there is no standard non parole period. The prisoner was born on 31 July 1971, on my very quick calculation, that would mean that he presently is 46 years of age, turning 47 in July this year.
At the time of committing this offence the prisoner was not strictly subject to conditional liberty but for one particular matter. It has not been the subject of address and really it is subsumed into the objective facts, but the prisoner was in custody appearing before the Supreme Court in relation to his trial on a charge of murder. He was charged in April 2013 with the murder of a person called Riley Dehn. At the time of the offence the prisoner was…

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 Scott, Michael Vincent

Details

AGLC: R v Scott, Michael Vincent [2018] NSWDC 290
Case: [2018] NSWDC 290
Decision Date: 27 April 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Michael Vincent Scott, was appealing against his sentence for attempting to pervert the course of justice. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. Scott had been on trial for the murder of a man when a note he had written to a witness was intercepted. The note was intended to influence the witness's testimony, and Scott was subsequently charged and convicted of perverting the course of justice. Scott appealed his sentence, arguing that the court had not taken into account certain special circumstances and that the sentence was excessive.

The court had to decide whether the sentence for perverting the course of justice was appropriate given the totality of the circumstances, including the special circumstances pleaded, and whether the sentence could be considered excessive when compared to the sentence Scott would receive for the murder charge. The court also had to consider the difficulty of sentencing for the lesser offence after the defendant had already been sentenced for the more serious charge.

The court found that the sentence for perverting the course of justice was not excessive and took into account the totality of the circumstances. The court noted that the note was opportunistic and that Scott had not shown any remorse. The court also found that the difficulty of sentencing for the lesser offence after the sentence for the more serious charge was a relevant consideration, but that it did not outweigh the other factors. The court concluded that the sentence was appropriate and dismissed the appeal. The defendant was sentenced to full-time imprisonment, with full details provided in paragraphs 50 to 52 of the judgement.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full time imprisonment. Full details at [50]-[52]

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 SCOTT, Michael Vincent [2018] NSWDC 290
Hearing dates:	23 February 2018
Decision date:	27 April 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Full time imprisonment. Full details at [50]-[52]
Catchwords:	CRIME – Sentence – intending to pervert the course of justice – note to witness by the accused on trial for murder intercepted – opportunistic – totality – special circumstances – difficulty of sentencing for lesser offence after sentence for murder
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Evidence Act 1995
Cases Cited:	Church v R [2012] NSWCCA 149 Einfeld v R [2008] NSWCCA 243 Hammoud v R [2000] NSWCCA 540 Marinellis v R [2006] NSWCCA 82 Mill v R (1988) 166 CLR 59 Pearce v R (1998) 194 CLR 610 R v Giang [2001] NSWCCA 276 R v King [2011] NSWCCA 274 R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 44 Scott v R [2017] NSWCCA 296 Taouk (1992) 65 A Crim R 387 Taylor v R [2007] NSWCCA 99 Thomson and Houlton v R (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Michael Vincent Scott
Representation:	Solicitors: Ms Gauld (Crown) Mr Murray (Offender)
File Number(s):	2015/00122115
Publication restriction:	Nil