Regina v Ang - [2001] NSWSC 758

CITATION: Regina v ANG [2001] NSWSC 758

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70026/01

HEARING DATE(S): 24 August, 2001

JUDGMENT DATE:
4 September 2001

PARTIES :

Regina
ANG

JUDGMENT OF: Ireland AJ at 1

COUNSEL : Mr P Dare - Crown
Mr R Greenhill SC/Mr W Barry - offender

SOLICITORS: SEO'Connor - Crown
John Ajaka - Offender

CATCHWORDS: Manslaughter by criminal negligence - pushing semi-conscious body of dececeased into river - early plea - offender affected by amphetamines placed in his drink by others without his knowledge - exceptional circumstances - well established rehabilitation - remorse - contrition. 2 year sentence of imprisonment suspended s.12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999

CASES CITED: R v Troja (NSW CCA 16.7.1991 unreported)
The Queen v Wade (NSW CCA 14.4.1989 unreported)
R v Blacklidge (NSW CCA 12.12.1995 unreported)
R v Dodd (1991) 57 A Crim R 349
R v Hill (1981) 3 A Crim R 397 at 402
R v Smith (1964) Crim LR 70
R v Hungerford (SC NSW 17.8.1993 unreported)
R v GDP (NSW CCA 24.4.1991 unreported)

DECISION: Non publication and broadcasting of the name of the offender and of the victim pursuant to s 11 Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 and I further order that there be no publication or broadcasting of any information which may identify the offender. Sentenced to 2 years imprisonment to date from 4.9.2001. Sentence will expire on 3.9.2003. Pursuant to s 12(1)(a) of Act, execution of the sentence be suspended for the 2 year term of the sentence. Pursuant to s 12(1)(b) I direct that the offender be released from custody on condition that he enters into a good behaviour bond for a term of 2 years, concurrent with this sentence, the said bond to include conditions.

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION

IRELAND AJ

Tuesday, 4 September, 2001

70026/01 - REGINA v A.N.G.

SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: The offender, ANG, was committed for trial from Cobham Children’s Court on 5 April 2001 on a charge alleging that he, on 9 October 1999 at Emu Plains, murdered GAC, the deceased, who was his uncle.

2 Upon arraignment in the Supreme Court on 6 July 2001, upon that charge, the offender pleaded not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. The Crown accepted that plea in full discharge of the indictment. The basis upon which the Crown accepted the plea was that of criminal negligence by pushing the semi-conscious body of the deceased into the Nepean River, resulting in his death by drowning.

3 It is agreed as between the parties that the offender indicated an intention to plead guilty to a charge of manslaughter prior to the committal hearing and that whilst the Director of Public Prosecutions did not act unreasonably in requiring the testing of evidence at committal in a charge as serious as murder, nevertheless, 6 July 2001 was, in the circumstances, the first opportunity available to the offender to enter his plea of guilty to the…

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 Ang

Details

AGLC: Regina v ANG [2001] NSWSC 758
Case: [2001] NSWSC 758
Decision Date: 4 September 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Regina v Ang, the defendant was convicted of manslaughter by criminal negligence, arising from an incident where he pushed the semi-conscious body of the deceased into a river. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The court was required to consider the appropriate sentence for Ang, taking into account mitigating factors such as the influence of amphetamines placed in his drink without his knowledge, his early plea, his well-established rehabilitation, and his remorse and contrition.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the exceptional circumstances of the case warranted a departure from the usual sentencing principles. The court had to balance the culpability of the defendant with the mitigating factors and consider the principles of justice and deterrence. The court also needed to assess whether a suspended sentence would be appropriate in light of the offender's rehabilitation and the likelihood of reoffending.

In reaching its decision, the court acknowledged the significant mitigating factors present in the case. Ang had no prior criminal history and had demonstrated a high degree of remorse and contrition. The court found that the amphetamines had substantially impaired his judgment and self-control at the time of the offence. Additionally, Ang had made significant efforts towards rehabilitation and had shown a commitment to changing his lifestyle. Considering these factors, the court determined that a suspended sentence would be appropriate to allow Ang to continue his rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The court sentenced Ang to two years' imprisonment, to be suspended after six months, under section 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

Orders