Regina v Andrew Glen Muddle - [2004] NSWSC 403

CITATION: REGINA v Andrew Glen MUDDLE [2004] NSWSC 403

HEARING DATE(S): 8/3/04, 9/3/04, 10/3/04, 11/3/04, 15/3/04, 16/3/04

JUDGMENT DATE:
21 May 2004

JUDGMENT OF: Bell J at 1

DECISION: Sentenced to a term of six years' imprisonment to-date from 15 December 2003; That sentence will expire on 14 December 2009 ; Non-parole period of three years; The first date on which the offender is eligible for consideration of release on parole is 14 December 2006

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Regina v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76

PARTIES :
REGINA
Andrew Glen MUDDLE (Accused)

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70064/03

COUNSEL: Mr L. Gray (Crown)
Ms C. Davenport (Accused)

SOLICITORS: S Kavanagh
SE O'Connor

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION

BELL J

21 May 2004

70064/03 REGINA v Andrew Glen MUDDLE
JUDGMENT

1 BELL J: On Monday 8 March 2004 Andrew Glen Muddle was arraigned on an indictment that charged him with the murder of Alan Edward Birch at Raymond Terrace on 6 February 2003. He entered a plea that he was not guilty. A jury was empanelled and the offender stood trial. On 16 March 2004 the jury returned its verdict. The offender was not guilty of murder but guilty of the manslaughter of Alan Edward Birch.

2 The deceased spent the early afternoon of 6 February 2003 with a friend, Rhett Cotton, at a local hotel. They were celebrating the deceased’s 23rd birthday. They spent several hours at the hotel and the deceased consumed a number of schooners of beer and several glasses of whiskey. The two young men were on friendly terms with the offender’s nephew, Jason Muddle. After leaving the hotel in the late afternoon they met up with Jason and his partner, Cassandra. Together the group went to visit the offender at his home at 7 Corelli Close, Raymond Terrace. They arrived at around 5:00 pm.

3 The offender was living in a de facto relationship with Julia Cadogan. The two have since married. He was aged just on 40 years at the time. He was on close terms with his nephew, Jason. Jason and his family lived in Raymond Terrace a short distance from Corelli Close. On occasions prior to February 2003 the deceased had visited the offender’s home in company with Jason. There was no history of ill feeling between the two.

4 On the evening of 6 February a number of people were present at the Corelli Close premises when Jason Muddle and his party arrived. The deceased and Rhett Cotton brought a carton of VB stubbies with them. Over the next few hours the offender, the deceased, and various others drank beer, smoked marijuana and talked. The atmosphere was congenial.

5 The deceased was noticeably affected by alcohol at the time of his arrival. It is reasonable to assume that he became progressively more intoxicated as the evening wore on. The offender was also intoxicated by a combination…

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 Regina v Andrew Glen Muddle

Details

AGLC: Regina v Andrew Glen Muddle [2004] NSWSC 403
Case: [2004] NSWSC 403
Decision Date: 21 May 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of New South Wales heard the case of Regina v Andrew Glen Muddle, where Muddle was charged with the manslaughter of Alan Edward Birch following a violent altercation. Muddle claimed self-defence, stating that he stabbed Birch because he feared for his life. The jury found Muddle guilty of manslaughter, accepting his account that the stabbing was an act of self-defence. The court considered the objective gravity of the offence, weighing the use of a weapon and the offender's belief in the necessity of self-defence against the lack of provocation by the deceased. The court found Muddle's actions to be an excessive response, resulting in excessive self-defence.

The sentencing focused on the offender's background, criminal history, and prospects for rehabilitation. Muddle had a history of alcohol and drug-related offences and a troubled upbringing marked by violence and instability. Despite this, the court noted his genuine remorse and commitment to rehabilitation, including efforts to improve his literacy and employment prospects while in custody. The court also considered the impact of the crime on the victim's family, acknowledging their profound grief and loss. Ultimately, the court determined that imprisonment was necessary, imposing a six-year sentence with a non-parole period of three years, reflecting the seriousness of the offence and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

Orders