WOOD -v- THE QUEEN [2002] WASCA 95
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2002] WASCA 95 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:46/2002 | 11 APRIL 2002 | |
| Coram: | WALLWORK J MURRAY J MILLER J | 23/04/02 | |
| 41 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Leave to appeal granted Appeal dismissed | ||
| A | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | SHARON PATRICIA WOOD THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Dangerous driving causing death Vehicle running off road through fatigue of driver Prior good character of offender Relevance of sentencing views of victim's widow Relevance of Crown submissions on sentence Whether sentence of imprisonment the only appropriate disposition |
Legislation: | Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s 52A Criminal Code, s 19A Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA), s 59, s 62 Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 6(4), s 7, s 8, s 39 |
Case References: | Ainsworth v D (A Child) (1992) 7 WAR 102 Cameron v The Queen (2002) 76 ALJR 382 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Carter [1998] 1 VR 601 Hartland v Umbagai (1999) 30 MVR 269 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Inge v The Queen (1999) 199 CLR 295 James v The Queen (1985) 14 A Crim R 364 Jiminez v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 572 Kaighin v The Queen (1990) 1 WAR 390 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665 Parsons v The Queen [2000] WASCA 407 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610 Police v Cadd (1997) 69 SASR 150 R v Guilfoyle [1973] 2 All ER 844 R v Jurisic (1998) 101 A Crim R 259; (1998) 45 NSWLR 209 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 R v Peterson [1984] WAR 329 R v Stebbings (1990) 4 WAR 538 Ryan v The Queen (2001) 75 ALJR 815 Smith v The Queen [1976] WAR 97 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Woods v Multi-Sport Holdings Pty Ltd [2002] HCA 9 Boswell (1984) 79 Cr App R 277 Etrelezis v The Queen [2001] WASCA 327 Hartland v Umbagai (1999) 30 MVR 269 Plenty v Bargain [1999] WASCA 67 R v Hicks (1987) 5 MRV 1 R v Hudson (1979) 1 Cr App R(S) 65 R v Johnston (1985) 38 SASR 582 R v Liddington (1997) 18 WAR 394 R v Millar [2002] WASCA 54 R v Pinder (1992) 8 WAR 19 R v Tanner (1987) 6 MVR 371 R v Van Schayk, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 2442, 13 October 1978 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : WOOD -v- THE QUEEN [2002] WASCA 95 CORAM : WALLWORK J
- MURRAY J
MILLER J
- Applicant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Dangerous driving causing death - Vehicle running off…
Continue reading Wood v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Wood v The Queen [2002] WASCA 95
- Case
- [2002] WASCA 95
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Wood v The Queen, the appellant faced sentencing following a conviction for dangerous driving that resulted in death. The tragic incident occurred when the appellant, fatigued from driving, caused his vehicle to run off the road, leading to the fatality. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence, considering the gravity of the offence and the appellant's prior good character. Additionally, the court needed to evaluate the relevance of the victim's widow's views on sentencing and the Crown's submissions regarding the appropriate sentence. A central issue was whether imprisonment was the only suitable disposition for the offence committed.
The court addressed the sentencing principles applicable to cases of dangerous driving causing death, emphasising the need to consider both the culpability of the offender and the circumstances of the offence. It examined the appellant's good character as a mitigating factor but also recognised the severe consequences of his actions. The court acknowledged the emotional impact on the victim's family, including the widow's perspective, but determined that while such views are important, they do not override the need to impose a sentence that is proportionate to the offence. The Crown's arguments were also considered, with the court weighing the submissions in the context of the overall sentencing framework.
After thorough consideration of the relevant factors, the court concluded that the sentence of imprisonment was the appropriate disposition. The severity of the offence and its consequences warranted a custodial sentence. The court rejected the appeal and dismissed the application for leave to appeal, affirming the original sentence imposed by the lower court. The reasoning underscored the necessity of balancing the principles of justice, deterrence, and rehabilitation in determining the appropriate penalty for the crime committed.
The court addressed the sentencing principles applicable to cases of dangerous driving causing death, emphasising the need to consider both the culpability of the offender and the circumstances of the offence. It examined the appellant's good character as a mitigating factor but also recognised the severe consequences of his actions. The court acknowledged the emotional impact on the victim's family, including the widow's perspective, but determined that while such views are important, they do not override the need to impose a sentence that is proportionate to the offence. The Crown's arguments were also considered, with the court weighing the submissions in the context of the overall sentencing framework.
After thorough consideration of the relevant factors, the court concluded that the sentence of imprisonment was the appropriate disposition. The severity of the offence and its consequences warranted a custodial sentence. The court rejected the appeal and dismissed the application for leave to appeal, affirming the original sentence imposed by the lower court. The reasoning underscored the necessity of balancing the principles of justice, deterrence, and rehabilitation in determining the appropriate penalty for the crime committed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Leave to appeal granted
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.