Woods v The Queen - [2018] NSWCCA 261

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Woods v R [2018] NSWCCA 261
Hearing dates: 1 June 2018
Date of orders: 23 November 2018
Decision date: 23 November 2018
Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Leeming JA at [51]; Adamson J at [52]
Decision:
(1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal.
(2) Dismiss the appeal.
Catchwords: SENTENCING – Subjective considerations on sentence – Mental illness – sentencing judge found that mental health conditions were not causally connected with the offending – whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to give weight to evidence of mental health conditions
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Johnston v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 53
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Linda Gaye Woods (applicant)
The Crown (respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Evers (applicant)
T Smith (respondent)
Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (respondent)

File Number(s): 2017/4293
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Citation:

N/A

Date of Decision:

4 August 2017

Before:

McLennan DCJ

File Number(s):

2017/4293

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

Between 2011 and 2016, Ms Linda Gaye Woods was employed by a transport and warehousing business. She was in charge of subcontractor payments for the business. In the course of her employment, Ms Woods defrauded the business of $809,510.07 by altering the invoices issued by subcontractors and redirecting parts of the payments to her own personal bank account. After an internal investigation, the business discovered the fraudulent transactions and reported the matter to police. During a police interview, Ms Woods made a full confession of her offending.

At the sentencing hearing, Ms Woods explained that she used the money from the fraudulent transactions to maintain a number of horses, despite initially using it to pay off personal debts and to fund her partner’s father’s care in a nursing home. Ms Woods’ relationship with her horses was described as an “addiction” or “passion” during the hearing. Ms Woods also relied on two reports made by a psychologist and a psychiatrist, which gave evidence that the applicant suffered from two mental health conditions at the time of the offending.

The sentencing judge sentenced Ms Woods to a term of imprisonment of five years, with a non-parole period of three years. Ms Woods sought leave to appeal from the sentence on the ground that the sentencing judge had failed to give effect to her mental health conditions in imposing a sentence.

The Court held that no error had been identified in the approach of the sentencing judge. The Court found that he had expressly taken both reports into account when sentencing, and was entitled to reach the conclusion that the mental health conditions were not causally connected to the offending. Further, the Court found that the sentencing judge did not err in…

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 Woods v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Woods v The Queen [2018] NSWCCA 261
Case: [2018] NSWCCA 261
Decision Date: 23 November 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Woods, was convicted of various serious criminal offences and sentenced to imprisonment by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central issue in this appeal to the High Court of Australia was whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to adequately consider the appellant's mental health conditions when determining the sentence. Woods contended that his mental health issues, which included depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder, should have been taken into account more significantly in the sentencing process.

The High Court examined the extent to which the sentencing judge was required to consider the appellant's mental health conditions. The court acknowledged that while mental health conditions could be relevant to sentencing, they do not automatically mitigate the severity of the offences committed. The court further noted that the sentencing judge had considered the appellant's mental health but found that they were not causally connected to the offending behaviour. The High Court found that the sentencing judge had correctly evaluated the evidence and appropriately balanced the mitigating factors against the gravity of the crimes.

The High Court concluded that the sentencing judge did not err in the manner in which they considered the appellant's mental health conditions. The court found that the judge had appropriately weighed the evidence and provided reasons for not giving significant weight to the mental health issues in determining the sentence. The appeal was thus dismissed, affirming the original sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The High Court's decision underscores the importance of a thorough evaluation of all relevant factors in sentencing, while also emphasising that mental health conditions do not necessarily absolve an offender from the consequences of their criminal actions.

Orders