WHITE -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 197

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2003] WASCA 197
Court:	COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL	Published:	28/08/2003
Case No:	CCA:1/2003	Heard:	17 APRIL 2003
Coram:	SCOTT J TEMPLEMAN J WHEELER J	Delivered:	17/04/03
No of pages:	12	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	MARK JOSEPH WHITE THE QUEEN
Catchwords:	Criminal law Appeal against sentence Manslaughter Motor vehicle collision Early plea and remorse only mitigating factors Whether discount must be quantified Whether error in imposition of severe sentence
Legislation:	Criminal Code, s 689(3) Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 8
Case References:	Nil Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : WHITE -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 197 CORAM : SCOTT J

TEMPLEMAN J

WHEELER J

HEARD : 17 APRIL 2003 DELIVERED : 17 APRIL 2003 PUBLISHED : 28 AUGUST 2003 FILE NO/S : CCA 1 of 2003 BETWEEN : MARK JOSEPH WHITE

Applicant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Appeal against sentence - Manslaughter - Motor vehicle collision - Early plea and remorse only mitigating factors - Whether discount must be quantified - Whether error in imposition of severe sentence

Legislation:

Criminal Code, s 689(3)

Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 8

(Page 2)

Result:

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Mr D M McKenna

Respondent : Mr D Dempster

Solicitors:

Applicant : Legal Aid of Western Australia

Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Nil

Case(s) also cited:

Nil

(Page 3)

1 TEMPLEMAN J: The applicant was charged with a number of offences arising from a motor vehicle collision in Northam on 4 October 2002. We are concerned with only two of those charges, which were of manslaughter. The first count on the indictment, which was issued ex officio, alleges that on or about 4 October 2002 at Northam, Mark Joseph White (the applicant) unlawfully killed Cheryl Ann Smith. The second count is in similar terms, relating to the unlawful killing of Timothy John Smith.

2 Mr and Mrs Smith were a young married couple with two young children. They were travelling in their Holden Commodore on the evening of 4 October 2002. Their car was hit by a vehicle driven by the applicant. The applicant had been drinking that night. His blood alcohol level was .072. He had borrowed a car, he not owning a car. He had been driving around the streets of Northam, apparently looking for some friends.

3 The applicant had a passenger with him in the car. On the evidence of the passenger, the applicant was driving somewhat recklessly. He was driving at somewhere between 60 and 70 kilometres an hour in a 50-kilometre zone.

4 He approached a traffic intersection where there was a stop sign. The night was clear, the weather was good, the stop sign was clearly visible.…

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 White v The Queen

Details

AGLC: White v The Queen [2003] WASCA 197
Case: [2003] WASCA 197
Decision Date: 28 AUGUST 2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of White v The Queen involves an appeal against a sentence imposed following a conviction for manslaughter due to a motor vehicle collision. The appellant, Mr White, was found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving, and was subsequently sentenced by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The appeal was brought to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the appellant challenged both the severity of the sentence and the method by which the court had applied the principles of sentencing.

The primary legal issues addressed in the appeal were whether the discount for early plea and remorse should be quantified and whether the trial judge had erred in imposing a severe sentence. Mr White argued that the trial judge had failed to properly consider the mitigating factors of his early plea and remorse, and that the discount for these factors should have been explicitly quantified. Additionally, he contended that the sentence imposed was excessive and did not appropriately balance the principles of punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

In delivering the judgment, the Court of Appeal emphasised the importance of ensuring that mitigating factors such as an early plea and expressions of remorse are given appropriate weight in the sentencing process. The Court held that while it is not strictly necessary to quantify the discount for these factors, the trial judge must clearly articulate how these factors have been considered in arriving at the sentence. The Court found that the trial judge had adequately considered the mitigating factors, and had appropriately balanced them against the need for punishment and deterrence. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal and denied leave to appeal the sentence imposed by the trial court.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.