Sean Moore Saxton v The Queen - [2017] VSCA 357

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

S APCR 2017 0089

SEAN MOORE SAXTON	Applicant
v
THE QUEEN	Respondent

---

JUDGES:	SANTAMARIA and COGHLAN JJA
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING:	3 November 2017
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	5 December 2017
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2017] VSCA 357
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM:	DPP v Saxton (Unreported, County Court of Victoria, Judge Ryan, 11 April 2017)

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Four charges of recklessly cause injury and one charge of assault – Victim applicant’s wife – Family violence over several years – 7 months and 14 days’ imprisonment and 2-year CCO – Whether manifestly excessive – Leave to appeal refused.

---

APPEARANCES:

Counsel

Solicitors

For the Applicant

Mr P J Smallwood

Stary Norton Halphen
(3 November 2017)

James Dowsley & Associates
(5 December 2017)

For the Crown

Ms D Piekusis

Mr J Cain, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

SANTAMARIA JA
COGHLAN JA:

On 1 December 2016, the applicant pleaded guilty to four charges of recklessly causing serious injury and one charge of common law assault. The victim was the applicant’s wife. On 11 April 2017, the applicant was sentenced in the County Court as follows:

Charge Offence Maximum Sentence Cumulation

1 Recklessly cause injury [Crimes Act 1958 s 18] 5 years 3 months’ imprisonment and 2-year community correction order (‘CCO’) 1 month

2 Recklessly cause injury [Crimes Act 1958 s 18] 5 years 60 days’ imprisonment and 2-year CCO 14 days

3
Common law assault

[Common law & Crimes Act 1958 s 320]
5 years 4 months’ imprisonment and 2-year CCO Base

4 Recklessly cause injury [Crimes Act 1958 s 18] 5 years 3 months’ imprisonment and 2-year CCO 1 month

5 Recklessly cause injury [Crimes Act 1958 s 18] 5 years 3 months’ imprisonment and 2-year CCO 1 month

Total effective sentence: 7 months and 14 days’ imprisonment and 2-year CCO

Pre-sentence detention declaration 119 days

Remand date 1 December 2017

Section 6AAA Statement 2 years’ imprisonment with non-parole period of 15 months

Other relevant orders
·     Supervision

·     Medical assessment and treatment

·     Mental Health assessment and treatment

·     Offending behaviour programs

The applicant now seeks leave to appeal his sentence.

Proposed ground of appeal

The applicant has proposed the following ground of appeal:

Ground 1 — That the sentence was manifestly excessive in all the circumstances.
Particulars of manifest excess
a) Failure to give any, or any appropriate, weight to the delay of nearly 3 years before charging;
b) Failure to give any, or any appropriate, weight to the particularly onerous time endured by the applicant on remand;
c) Failure to give any, or any appropriate, weight to contemporaneous and unqualified admissions and request for help from the applicant;
d) Failure to give any, or any appropriate, weight to the accused voluntarily seeking treatment for his Mental Health Issues;
e) Failure to give any, or any appropriate, weight to prior good character of the applicant;
f) Affording undue weight to the accused’s stated belief that he…

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 Sean Moore Saxton v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Sean Moore Saxton v The Queen [2017] VSCA 357
Case: [2017] VSCA 357
Decision Date: 5 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Sean Moore Saxton appealed against his conviction and sentence for four charges of recklessly causing injury and one charge of assault against his wife. The dispute arose out of a long history of family violence. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia. The central legal issues before the court were whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly excessive and whether the applicant was entitled to leave to appeal.

The High Court found that the sentence of imprisonment and community correction order was not manifestly excessive. The court examined the totality of the offending, the need for general deterrence, and the impact on the victim. It concluded that the sentence was within the range of reasonable sentences that could be imposed for such offences. The court also found that there were no grounds for granting leave to appeal. The High Court held that the appeal did not raise an arguable point of law of general public importance.

The applicant was not granted leave to appeal and the original sentence was affirmed. The High Court’s decision emphasised the importance of considering the totality of the offending and the need for appropriate sentencing in cases of family violence.

Orders