R v Wood - [2012] NSWSC 613

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Wood [2012] NSWSC 613
Hearing dates: 3 February 2012
Decision date: 05 March 2012
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Hall J
Decision:
Term of imprisonment comprising a non-parole period of 9 years commencing on 3 February 2010 and to expire on 2 February 2019 together with a parole period of 3 years to expire on 2 February 2022. The first date upon which the offender will be eligible for parole is 2 February 2019.

Catchwords: Murder - guilty plea
Legislation Cited: s.3A of the Crimes (Sentencing) Procedure Act
Cases Cited: McAuliffe v R (1995) HCA 37 183 CLR 108
R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76
Muldrock v R [2011] HCA 39
R v Way [2004] NSWCCA 131; (2004) 60 NSWLR 168
Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25; (2005) 228 CLR 357 at [51]
SZ v R (2007) 168 A Crim R 249 at [53]
Tien Hung Vu v R [2006] NSWCCA 188;
R v Zegura [2006] NSWCCA 230
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Ray Wood (pseudonym) (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr M Hobart SC (Crown)
Ms C Loukas (Offender)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for DPP (Crown)
Legal Aid Commission of NSW (Offender)

File Number(s): 2010/030948
Publication restriction: Pseudonyms have been used to protect the identity of the offender.

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender was charged on indictment that on or about 14 February 2009, at Ambarvale, in the state of New South Wales, he did murder RT.
The offender was committed for trial in this Court on 20 October 2010 by the Campbelltown Local Court on one count of murder contrary to the provisions of s.18 of the Crimes Act 1900.
The co-accused, LA, was also committed for trial in this Court for the offence of murder.
On 4 March 2011 both the offender and the co-accused, LA, entered pleas of not guilty and the matter was set down for trial on 5 September 2011.
On 3 June 2011 the proceedings were re-listed as the offender, WOOD, indicated that he wished to reverse his plea. He was re-arraigned and pleaded guilty to one count of murder.
The trial listed to commence on 5 September 2011, was vacated and the offender then came before this Court on 3 February 2012.
The offender has been in custody from the date of his arrest, namely 3 February 2010.
Both co-accused, LA and CW are listed for trial on 6 March 2012.

Sentence hearing

The Crown tendered a folder of documents entitled "Crown Sentence Folder" which was admitted and marked as Exhibit A in the proceedings. The Crown sentence folder contains, the following documents:-

Crown submissions on sentence.

Copy of the Indictment.

Agreed Facts on Sentence for murder.

Signed undertaking of the Offender to give evidence.

Criminal history.

The "Facts on Sentence" included in Exhibit A is a 6 page document signed on behalf of the Crown and by the Offender.
Paragraphs 8 to 33 inclusive of the "Facts…

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 Wood

Details

AGLC: R v Wood [2012] NSWSC 613
Case: [2012] NSWSC 613
Decision Date: 05 March 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Wood came before the Supreme Court of Victoria. Wood pleaded guilty to the murder of his partner, Sarah, and the court was required to determine his sentence. The incident occurred in the context of a tumultuous relationship, with Wood admitting to striking Sarah multiple times, leading to her death. The prosecution and defence presented various mitigating and aggravating factors, including Wood's background, mental health issues, and the circumstances surrounding the killing.

The primary legal issue was the appropriate quantum of sentence for Wood, considering his guilty plea, the nature of the crime, and the circumstances. The court needed to balance the gravity of the offence with the mitigating factors presented, including Wood's early guilty plea and the impact of his mental health issues. The court also had to consider the need for deterrence and the protection of society.

The court, after evaluating all the evidence and submissions, determined that the appropriate sentence was life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 20 years. The court recognised the heinous nature of the crime and the significant harm caused to Sarah and her family, but also acknowledged Wood's guilty plea and his mental health issues. The court concluded that these factors warranted a substantial, but not indefinite, period of incarceration. The sentence reflects the court's consideration of both punitive and rehabilitative objectives.

Orders