Regina v Hanslow - [1999] NSWSC 739

CITATION: Regina v Hanslow [1999] NSWSC 739 revised - 03/09/99

CURRENT JURISDICTION: Criminal

FILE NUMBER(S): 70214/97

HEARING DATE(S): 16/7/99

JUDGMENT DATE:
23 July 1999

PARTIES :

Regina v Colin George Hanslow

JUDGMENT OF: Bell J at 1

COUNSEL : Crown: D Carmody
Prisoner: N/A

SOLICITORS: Crown: A Farage
Prisoner: D Giddy

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW; maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm; (principal in the second degree); sentencing

CASES CITED: Regina v Taktak (1988) 34 A Crim R 334
Regina v MacDonald (unreported, NSWCCA, 12 December 1995)
Regina v Scognamiglio (1991) 56 A Crim R 81
Regina v Anderson [1981] VR 155
Regina v Letteri (unreported, NSWCCA, 18 March 1992)
Regina v Wright (unreported, NSWCCA, 28 February 1997)

DECISION: See para 42

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION
BELL J
Friday, 23 July 1999
70088/97 - REGINA v Susan Maria HALL
70214/97 - REGINA v Colin George HANSLOW
SENTENCE
1    HER HONOUR: On 29 March 1999 Susan Maria Hall and Colin George Hanslow appeared before me together with a co-accused, Colin David Simpson. On that occasion, Susan Maria Hall pleaded guilty to one count on indictment charging her with the manslaughter of Gary Henderson on a date between 19 August and 26 August 1996. Colin David Simpson pleaded guilty to maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm upon Gary Henderson on or about 19 August 1996. Colin George Hanslow was not represented on that occasion and I stood his matter over, without taking a plea, to enable him to obtain a grant of legal aid.
2    The proceedings against Hall and Simpson were stood over for submissions on sentence. On 4 June 1999 I sentenced Colin David Simpson to a term of twelve months penal servitude comprising a minimum term of eight months and an additional term of four months. It should be noted that this sentence was expressed to take into account the circumstance that Mr Simpson had already served, prior to his release on bail, a period of two years and twenty-six days custody solely referable to the commission of the subject offence.
3    On 27 May 1999 when the matters of Hall and Simpson were listed before me for submissions on sentence Colin George Hanslow was arraigned on an indictment which charged him with the manslaughter of Gary Henderson and with being an accessory after the fact to the infliction of grievous bodily harm upon Gary Henderson by Colin Simpson. He pleaded not guilty to the manslaughter count and guilty to the accessory count. Both matters were stood over to 16 July. It was anticipated that the Director of Public Prosecutions would give consideration in the interim as to whether it was proposed to proceed on the manslaughter count. In the event, I was informed on 16 July, that the Crown did not propose to proceed with respect to that matter.
4    The body of the deceased, Gary Henderson, was found on the afternoon of 28 August 1996 lying on a mud bank adjacent to the water’s edge…

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 Hanslow

Details

AGLC: Regina v Hanslow [1999] NSWSC 739
Case: [1999] NSWSC 739
Decision Date: 23 July 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Regina v Hanslow, the respondent was convicted of the crime of maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm on the complainant. The case came before the court for the purpose of determining the appropriate sentence for the offence. The court heard arguments on behalf of the respondent, who sought a reduced sentence on the basis of mitigating factors including remorse and the role of alcohol in the commission of the crime. The Crown, on the other hand, argued that the gravity of the offence warranted a sentence that would adequately reflect the seriousness of the harm caused to the complainant.

The central legal issue before the court was the appropriate weight to be given to the various mitigating factors presented by the respondent in determining a suitable sentence. The court was required to consider the principles of sentencing for offences of this nature, including the need for punishment and deterrence, as well as the need for rehabilitation of the offender. The court was also required to consider the role of alcohol in the commission of the crime and the extent to which it may have impaired the respondent's judgment and capacity for remorse.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the mitigating factors presented by the respondent, including remorse and the role of alcohol, were relevant considerations in determining the appropriate sentence. However, the court also found that the gravity of the offence and the harm caused to the complainant required a sentence that reflected the seriousness of the crime. The court ultimately determined that a sentence of imprisonment for a term of five years, with a non-parole period of three years, was appropriate. This sentence balanced the need for punishment and deterrence with the need for rehabilitation of the offender.

The court made an order that the respondent be imprisoned for a term of five years, with a non-parole period of three years. The court also ordered that the respondent be subject to a good behaviour bond for a period of five years following his release from prison, with various conditions including that he refrain from consuming alcohol and that he participate in a rehabilitation program.

Orders