R v Skondin

In the case of R v Skondin, the appellant contested his conviction and sentence for manslaughter. The appellant, who had a significant criminal history, was convicted for striking the deceased with mild to moderate force to the back of the head, leading to the deceased's death. The incident was partially recorded on CCTV, and the appellant's account to police was inconsistent regarding whether the deceased had made physical contact with him first. The appellant argued that the jury could not reasonably have excluded the defences of self-defence and prevention of repetition of insult and the excuses of accident and compulsion. The appeal also addressed the conduct of the appellant's defence counsel, alleging incompetence in several areas.

The court examined whether the verdict was unreasonable or insupportable given the evidence, and whether the appellant's trial counsel's conduct amounted to a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the appellant's defence counsel's alleged incompetence did not cause a miscarriage of justice, as the appellant lost nothing through the lack of a defence opening statement, and the Crown prosecutor had already raised the relevant defences. The court concluded that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable.

The appeal against the sentence was considered on the basis of whether it was manifestly excessive or inadequate. The appellant, who had a long criminal history but a limited history of violent offences, was sentenced to ten years imprisonment with an automatic serious violent offence declaration. The court found that the sentence was manifestly excessive, taking into account the appellant's age, the circumstances of the offence, and his criminal history. The sentence was varied to nine years imprisonment with parole eligibility on 20 March 2017, while maintaining the declaration that the 784 days spent in pre-sentence custody was time already served under the sentence.

The final orders of the court were to grant the application to adduce evidence, dismiss the appeal against conviction, grant the application for leave to appeal against sentence, allow the appeal against sentence, and vary the sentence imposed at first instance.