Vincec v The Queen

The applicant in this case, Vincec, appealed against his sentence for unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter. The incident occurred in a busy city street at night, resulting in the death of the victim, who suffered a fractured skull and brain damage after being struck by a single punch to the head. The trial judge sentenced Vincec to eight years in prison with a non-parole period of five years. The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, whether the judge was unduly influenced by Victim Impact Statements and the esteem in which the victim was held, and whether the judge overstated the objective gravity of the offence.

The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and that the judge did not err in their assessment of the objective gravity of the offence. The court found that the judge properly considered the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the act and the resulting harm, in determining the appropriate sentence. The court also held that the judge was not unduly influenced by Victim Impact Statements or the esteem in which the victim was held, as the judge's sentencing remarks demonstrated a balanced approach to all relevant factors. The court concluded that the sentence was appropriate and did not manifest any error of law or principle.

In light of the above, the court refused leave to appeal. The court held that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive and that the judge did not err in their assessment of the objective gravity of the offence or in considering the circumstances of the case. The court further held that the judge's sentencing remarks demonstrated a balanced approach to all relevant factors, including the Victim Impact Statements and the esteem in which the victim was held. The court found no error of law or principle in the sentence imposed and therefore refused leave to appeal.