Legal Research
Cases
Stevens v R

Stevens v R

Case [2017] NSWCCA 216 6 September 2017

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Stevens v R [2017] NSWCCA 216
Hearing dates: 30 August 2017
Date of orders: 06 September 2017
Decision date: 06 September 2017
Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]
Davies J at [2]
Bellew J at [3]
Decision:
(1) Leave to appeal is granted.
(2) The appeal is dismissed.

Catchwords: Criminal law – Appeal – Sentence – Charge of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm – Where applicant struck the victim from behind in an unprovoked attack causing the victim to fall to the ground and lose consciousness – Where victim suffered a number of injuries including a haemorrhagic contusion of the brain, a fracture of the orbital wall and a laceration to the left forehand – Where victim left with permanent scarring, intermittent headaches, flashbacks, nightmares and rapid mood swings – Whether the sentencing Judge erred in his categorisation of the injuries – Whether sentence was manifestly excessive – No error on the part of the sentencing Judge – Necessity to bear in mind that the injury is not the sole determining factor of sentence for this type of offending – Sentence not manifestly excessive – Leave to appeal granted – Appeal dismissed
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Cases Cited: R v Mitchell; R v Gallagher [2007] NSWCCA 296
R v McCulloch [2009] NSWCCA 94
AM v R [2012] NSWCCA 203
R v Zhang [2004] NSWCCA 358
R v Woods NSWCCA 9 October 1990 unreported
Dinsdale v R (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Troy Richard Stevens – Applicant
Regina – Respondent
Representation:
Counsel:
T Gartelmann SC – Applicant
F Veltro - Respondent
Solicitors:
Chadi Irani – Applicant
C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions – Respondent

File Number(s): 2015/188339
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

21 November 2016

Before:

Acting Judge Delaney

Judgment

HOEBEN CJ AT CL: I agree with Bellew J.
DAVIES J: I agree with Bellew J.
BELLEW J: On 28 September 2016 an indictment was presented against Troy Richard Stevens (“the applicant”) containing the following counts:

On the 25th day of June 2015, at Bondi Junction in the State of New South Wales, caused grievous bodily harm to Francis Noble-Shelton with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (count 1).

On the 25th day of June 2015, at Bondi Junction in the State of New South Wales, recklessly caused grievous bodily harm to Francis Noble-Shelton (count 2).

The applicant pleaded guilty to count 2, which was expressed as an alternative to count 1. That plea was accepted by the Crown in full discharge of the indictment. The offending in count 2 was contrary to s. 35(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (“the Act”). The maximum penalty applicable to that offence is imprisonment for 10 years. A standard non-parole period of 4 years is prescribed.
On 21 November 2016 the applicant was sentenced…

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 Stevens v R

Details

AGLC: Stevens v R [2017] NSWCCA 216
Case: [2017] NSWCCA 216
Decision Date: 06 September 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Stevens was charged with recklessly causing grievous bodily harm following an unprovoked attack on the victim. The attack left the victim with significant injuries, including a haemorrhagic contusion of the brain, a fracture of the orbital wall, and a laceration to the left forehand. The victim was also left with permanent scarring, intermittent headaches, flashbacks, nightmares, and rapid mood swings. Stevens appealed against his sentence, arguing that the sentencing judge had erred in categorising the severity of the injuries and that the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court was required to consider whether the sentencing judge had correctly assessed the severity of the injuries and whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The court had to determine if the judge had appropriately balanced the severity of the injuries with other relevant factors, such as the nature of the offence and the circumstances surrounding the attack.

The court found that the sentencing judge had not erred in categorising the severity of the injuries, and the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The court emphasised that when sentencing for this type of offence, the severity of the injury was not the sole determining factor. The court considered the nature of the offence, the circumstances of the attack, and the impact on the victim. The court noted that the sentence imposed was within the appropriate range for the offence, and there was no basis to conclude that it was manifestly excessive. Consequently, the court granted leave to appeal but dismissed the appeal.

The court did not alter the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge, and Stevens was required to serve the sentence as determined.

Orders