R v Turner

In the matter of R v Turner, the appellant challenged the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge. The appellant had pleaded guilty to dangerously operating a vehicle, causing grievous bodily harm. The appellant had no prior criminal history and had entered a guilty plea at an early stage. The sentencing judge sentenced the appellant to two years’ imprisonment, suspended after serving six months in custody. The appellant contended that the sentence was manifestly excessive and that the learned sentencing judge wrongly permitted considerations of general deterrence to overwhelm the sentencing discretion.

The court considered whether the learned sentencing judge had wrongly permitted considerations of general deterrence to overwhelm the sentencing discretion. The court observed that the need for general deterrence and denunciation warranted a sentence which saw the appellant serve some actual imprisonment. The court also considered whether the sentence required six months actual imprisonment and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court rejected the contention that the learned sentencing judge wrongly permitted considerations of general deterrence to overwhelm the sentencing discretion. The court found that the appellant was driving at an inappropriate speed, and recklessly, and that proper care and astute observation of traffic signals would have made it plain to the appellant that he was in the wrong lane. The court held that the need for general deterrence and denunciation warranted a sentence which saw the appellant serve some actual imprisonment.

The court made two orders. Firstly, the application for leave to appeal was refused. Secondly, the registrar was directed to procure the correction of the endorsement of the indictment to accord with the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge of imprisonment of 2 years suspended after 6 months for an operational period of 3 years.