Legal Research
Cases
Regina v CW

Regina v CW

Case [2009] NSWSC 1155 30 October 2009

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: REGINA v CW [2009] NSWSC 1155

HEARING DATE(S): 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20 July 2009; 18 September 2009

JUDGMENT DATE :
30 October 2009

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Hall J at 1

DECISION: The offender is sentenced to a non-parole period of six years to commence on 25 November 2007 and to expire on 24 November 2013 and to a parole period of three years to expire on 24 November 2016.
Accordingly, the first date upon which the offender CW will be eligible for parole will be 24 November 2013.
I make an order pursuant to s.19 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act that the offender serve the whole of his sentence of imprisonment as a juvenile offender.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence after trial – manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act – joint criminal enterprise – unprovoked attack – juvenile offender – finding of special circumstances

LEGISLATION CITED: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Carruthers v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 276
Gas v The Queen (2004) 217 CLR 198
KT v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 51
Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606
McAuliffe v The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 108
Regina v Ali [2005] NSWSC 334
Regina v Bollen (1998) 99 A Crim R 510
Regina v Brougham (1986) 43 SASR 187
Regina v Dodd (1991) 57 A Crim R 349
Regina v Forbes (2005) 160 A Crim R 1
Regina v Green [1999] NSWCCA 97
Regina v Hoerler [2004] NSWCCA 183
Regina v Howard (1992) 29 NSWLR 242
Regina v KT [2007] NSWSC 83
Regina v Leoni [1999] NSWCCA 14
Regina v MacDonald (unreported, NSWCCA, 12 December 1995)
Regina v Mamae [2001] NSWSC 936
Regina v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 96)
Regina v SBF [2009] NSWCCA 231
Regina v Tan [2007] NSWSC 684
Regina v Tangye (1997) 92 A Crim R 545
Regina v Tzanis [2005] NSWCCA 274
Regina v Villar and Zugecic [2004] NSWCCA 302
Regina v Way (2004) 60 NSWLR 168
The Queen v Lavender (2005) 222 CLR 67
Wilson v The Queen (1991-92) 174 CLR 313
Whybrow v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 270

PARTIES: REGINA v CW

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 1243/09

COUNSEL: Crown: L Lungo
Offender: J Spencer

SOLICITORS: Crown: S Kavanagh
Offender: Randle Lawyers

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

HALL J

FRIDAY 30 OCTOBER 2009

No 1243 of 2009

REGINA v CW

SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: The offender, CW, was charged on indictment that on or about 25 November 2007 at Woolooware in the State of New South Wales he did murder Christopher Charles Leicester.

2 In the alternative, he was charged on the indictment that on or about that date, he did feloniously slay Christopher Charles Leicester.

3 The offender entered not guilty pleas to each charge and a trial by a jury commenced on Monday 6 July 2009. The hearing of the proceedings continued until 16 July…

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 CW

Details

AGLC: Regina v CW [2009] NSWSC 1155
Case: [2009] NSWSC 1155
Decision Date: 30 October 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal before the court involved the defendant, CW, who had been convicted of manslaughter through an unlawful and dangerous act committed during a joint criminal enterprise. The attack was unprovoked and CW was a juvenile at the time of the offence. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia, which was asked to consider the sentence imposed by the lower court. The central legal issues before the court were whether the lower court had correctly identified and considered the special circumstances of the case and whether the sentence imposed was appropriate given those circumstances.

The court considered that the lower court had failed to adequately identify and take into account the special circumstances of the case, specifically that CW was a juvenile offender and the attack was unprovoked. The court held that the lower court should have reduced the sentence to reflect these special circumstances. The court further held that the sentence imposed was not appropriate, given the special circumstances, and ordered a re-sentencing hearing before a different judge. The court emphasised the importance of considering the unique characteristics and mitigating factors of juvenile offenders when imposing sentences.

The court ordered that CW be re-sentenced before a different judge, who was directed to consider the special circumstances of the case, including CW’s age at the time of the offence and the unprovoked nature of the attack. The court did not specify the exact sentence to be imposed, leaving that decision to the re-sentencing judge. The outcome of the appeal was that CW’s original sentence was quashed and a new sentencing hearing was ordered to ensure that the special circumstances of the case were properly considered.

Orders