Wright v The Queen

The case of Wright v The Queen involved the applicant, who had been convicted of attempted murder. The applicant had struck the victim with a hammer on three to four occasions. The primary issue for the court was whether the applicant had desisted of his own accord from furthering his intent to kill the victim. This involved assessing whether there was any intervention that affected the applicant's conduct and led to the cessation of the assault.

The court examined the nature and circumstances of the offence, focusing on the applicant's actions and the potential impact of any intervening factors. The applicant argued that he stopped the assault when the victim ceased screaming and he was able to regain focus. The court considered whether the applicant's decision to stop was genuinely spontaneous or influenced by external factors. The applicant's claim of self-restraint was central to the determination of his sentence, as it could impact the perceived gravity of the offence.

In its reasoning, the court found that the applicant had indeed desisted of his own volition from further prosecuting his intention to kill the victim. The court accepted that there was no intervention that effectively influenced the applicant's conduct or caused the cessation of the assault. Consequently, the court ruled that the applicant's actions were a result of his own decision to stop, which was a relevant factor in sentencing. The final orders confirmed that the applicant desisted of his own motion from the further prosecution of his intention to kill the victim.