Regina v Wright - [1999] NSWSC 1087

CITATION: Regina v Wright [1999] NSWSC 1087

CURRENT JURISDICTION: Criminal

FILE NUMBER(S): 70052/97

HEARING DATE(S): 23 August 1999, 15 October 1999, 22 October 1999

JUDGMENT DATE:
5 November 1999

PARTIES :

Regina v David John Wright

JUDGMENT OF: Bell J at 1

COUNSEL : Mr M Marien (Crown)
Ms L Flannery (Prisoner)

SOLICITORS: S E O'Connor (Crown)
Legal Aid Commission (Prisoner)

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE - sentencing - manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act - special circumstances (Sentencing Act 1987 (NSW) s 5(2))

ACTS CITED: Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Sentencing Act 1987

CASES CITED: R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76
R v Taouk (unreported, CCA, 20 March 1992)
R v Azar (1991) 56 A Crim R 414
R v Owen (unreported, CCA, 5 June 1996)
R v Sofokleous (unreported, CCA, 13 December 1993)
R v Bryant (unreported, CCA, 26 June 1999)
R v Lamb (unreported, Hidden J, 20 March 1998)
R v Blacklidge (unreported, CCA, 12 December 1995)
R v MacDonald (unreported, CCA, 12 December 1995)
R v Fernando (1992) 76 A Crim R 58

DECISION: See para 37

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION
BELL J
Friday, 5 November 1999

70052/97 - REGINA v David John WRIGHT

SENTENCE
1 HER HONOUR: On 23 August 1999 the prisoner, David John Wright, was arraigned on an indictment charging him with the murder of Geoffrey Compton at Riverwood on 16 October 1996. To this indictment he entered a plea of guilty to the manslaughter of Mr Compton which was accepted in full discharge of the indictment. I am informed that the basis upon which the plea was accepted was one of manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act. It is upon this basis that the prisoner will be sentenced.
2 On the evening of 16 October 1996 Geoffrey Compton was drinking at the Riverwood Inn, Riverwood. It appears that he was intoxicated and his behaviour towards a number of patrons of the hotel was disruptive. At about 9.30pm the prisoner became involved in a verbal altercation with the deceased. The prisoner did not initiate this incident. It led to the two of them leaving the hotel and going outside to the carpark where they started fighting. At one point the deceased was seen to be holding the prisoner in a headlock and punching him about the head. During this fight the prisoner stabbed the deceased with a knife which he, the prisoner, was carrying. The deceased suffered four stab wounds, one to the ear, two small wounds to the groin area, and the fatal wound, a 20 millimetre wound to the heart. It was while the prisoner was seen to be being held in the headlock that other patrons came over and separated the two. The prisoner walked off in the direction of Bonds Road. It was not clear at that time that the deceased had received a fatal injury. Patrons of the hotel held the deceased over a car bonnet in 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 Wright

Details

AGLC: Regina v Wright [1999] NSWSC 1087
Case: [1999] NSWSC 1087
Decision Date: 5 November 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the defendant, Wright, who was found guilty of manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence, taking into account the statutory provisions for special circumstances. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the court was the assessment of the special circumstances under the Sentencing Act 1987 (NSW) section 5(2). This required the court to consider factors such as the defendant's remorse, any mitigating factors, and the impact of the crime on the victim's family. The court had to balance these considerations against the gravity of the offence to determine an appropriate penalty.

The court acknowledged the defendant's remorse and recognised the tragic impact of the incident on the victim's family. However, it also considered the inherent danger of the act that led to the manslaughter. After weighing these factors, the court determined that the special circumstances warranted a sentence below the maximum penalty but still reflective of the seriousness of the crime. The court imposed a sentence that was deemed to be just and proportionate to the offence committed.

The final orders included the imposition of a custodial sentence with specific parole conditions, reflecting the court's consideration of both the mitigating factors and the need to uphold public confidence in the justice system. The exact term and conditions were detailed in the judgment, ensuring clarity and enforceability.

Orders