Wright v The Queen

[2015] VSCA 333

SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

COURT OF APPEAL

S APCR 2015 0025

JESSE WRIGHT	Appellant
v
THE QUEEN	Respondent

---

JUDGES:	MAXWELL P, REDLICH and OSBORN JJA
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING:	16 November 2015
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	10 December 2015
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSCA 333	1st Revision, 19 December 2016, Catchwords —citation for R v Verdins
JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM:	DPP v Wright (Unreported, County Court of Victoria, Judge Taft, 18 November 2014)

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Sentence – Rape, indecent assault, theft – Impairment of mental functioning – Schizophrenia – Whether moral culpability reduced – Community protection – Risk of reoffending – Countervailing sentencing considerations – Mental illness well controlled by prescribed medication – Recurrence caused by taking of methamphetamine – Causation – Whether offending attributable to drug-taking – Whether commencement of drug-taking referable to mental illness – General deterrence – Whether appellant suitable vehicle – No error – Appeal dismissed – R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269 applied, DPP v Patterson [2009] VSCA 222, Johnston v The Queen [2013] VSCA 362 referred to.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Appellant	Mr D A Dann	Grigor Lawyers
For the Respondent	Mr G J C Silbert QC with Mr B L Sonnet	Mr J Cain, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

MAXWELL P
REDLICH JA
OSBORN JA:

Summary

1. The appellant (‘JW’)[1] suffers from schizophrenia.  He was first diagnosed at the age of 20, after experiencing his first psychotic episode.  For almost 20 years, he was compliant with his antipsychotic medications and lived a law-abiding life.  He completed a landscaping apprenticeship and was employed in that field.

   [1]The abbreviation is used for ease of reference only.

1. In 2012, however, JW began taking methamphetamine and ceased taking his prescribed medication.  Over the period 2012–14, he committed criminal offences of increasing seriousness, culminating in very serious offences of aggravated burglary and rape.  Expert psychiatric evidence before the sentencing court established that the methamphetamine had caused JW to experience sexually obsessive thoughts and had led to a recurrence of auditory hallucinations.

1. The submission for JW on the plea (as on the appeal) was that the presence of psychotic symptoms at the time of the offending warranted a reduction in his moral culpability.  The judge concluded, however, that the cause of the offending was not the underlying mental illness — which had been well controlled by medication — but his taking of methamphetamine instead of his prescribed medication, which he had continued to do even after he had come to appreciate the effects which methamphetamine had on him.

1. The appellant’s case is that the sentencing judge did not take into account a relevant consideration and, as a result, erred in the exercise of his discretion.[2]  For reasons which follow, we have concluded that there was no such error.  On the contrary, we respectfully agree with his Honour’s reasoning with respect to the question of moral culpability.

   [2]House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499, 505 (Dixon, Evatt and McTiernan…