Legal Research
Cases
R v Wright

R v Wright

Case [2013] NSWCCA 82 22 April 2013

Appeal

Criminal Liability

Sentencing

Aggravated dangerous driving occasioning death

Aggravated dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm

Mental illness

Moral culpability

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Wright [2013] NSWCCA 82
Hearing dates: 3 April 2013
Decision date: 22 April 2013
Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]
Price J at [2]
Hulme AJ at [90]
Decision:
1.Leave to appeal granted.
2.Appeal dismissed.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - sentence - s 52A - Aggravated dangerous driving occasioning death - Aggravated dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm -effect on offender - mental illness - moral culpability - extra-curial suffering - whether manifestly excessive - statistics - whether outside range
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 s 52A(2), 52A(4)
Cases Cited: Bombardieri v R (2010) 203 A Crim R 89; [2010] NSWCCA 161
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Duncan v R [2012] NSWCCA 78
Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67
Hughes v R (2008) 185 A Crim R 155; [2008] NSWCCA 48
Markarian v R (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610; [1998] HCA 57
R v Cameron (2005) 157 A Crim R 70; [2005] NSWCCA 359
R v Cousins [2002] NSWCCA 81
R v Howcher (2004) 146 A Crim R 371; [2004] NSWCCA 179
R v Jaworowski (1999) 108 A Crim R 489; [1999] NSWCCA 430
R v Koosmen [2004] NSWCCA 359
R v Vachalec [1981] 1 NSWLR 351
R v Vukic [2003] NSWCCA 13
R v Woodward [2001] NSWCCA 90
Rosenthal v R [2008] NSWCCA 149
The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54
Thompson v R [2007] NSWCCA 299
Texts Cited: Butterworths Criminal Practice and Procedure, Vol 1
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Grant David Wright (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel: D Carroll (Applicant)
N Adams SC + J Davidson (Respondent)
Solicitors: B Sandland (Applicant)
S Kavanagh (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2011/67275
Decision under appeal

Jurisdiction:

9101

Date of Decision:

2012-05-24 00:00:00

Before:

Robison DCJ

File Number(s):

2011/67275

Judgment

MACFARLAN JA: I agree with Price J.

PRICE J: The applicant, Grant David Wright, seeks leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon him by Robison DCJ in the District Court at Grafton on 24 May 2012. He had pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated dangerous driving causing the death of CAM contrary to s 52A(2) Crimes Act 1900 (count one) and one count of aggravated dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm to MBJ contrary to s 52A(4) Crimes Act (count two).

The matters of aggravation averred to in each charge were driving the vehicle by more than 45 kph over the speed limit and driving the vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor, having in his blood a prescribed concentration of alcohol of not less than 0.157 grams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood.

An offence contrary to s 52A(2) Crimes Act is punishable by a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment,…

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 Wright

Details

AGLC: R v Wright [2013] NSWCCA 82
Case: [2013] NSWCCA 82
Decision Date: 22 April 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Wright involved the appellant, who was convicted of aggravated dangerous driving occasioning death and grievous bodily harm. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia. The appeal was against the appellant's conviction and sentence, focusing on whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the sentence imposed on the appellant was manifestly excessive, considering his mental illness and the impact on his moral culpability. The court also examined whether the sentence was outside the range of sentences typically imposed for similar offences. The appellant argued that his mental health condition and extra-curial suffering should have been considered more heavily in determining the sentence.

The court considered the appellant's mental health and extra-curial suffering but ultimately concluded that these factors did not render the sentence manifestly excessive. The court also found that the sentence was within the range of sentences typically imposed for similar offences. The court held that while the appellant's mental illness and extra-curial suffering were relevant, they did not outweigh the gravity of the offences committed.

The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld. The court found that the sentence was appropriate given the circumstances and did not fall outside the range of sentences imposed for similar offences. The decision underscored the importance of considering the offender's circumstances but also emphasised the need to balance these considerations against the gravity of the offence.

Orders