Regina v V D N [2004] NSWSC 426
The offender's participation in an armed robbery attempt, knowing that knives would be presented, made him criminally responsible for manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act even though he was not proved to be the stabber or the person who fired the gun. His objective criminality was serious, but was moderated by his youth, role as a principal in the second degree, remorse, guilty pleas, rehabilitation prospects and special circumstances. Imprisonment was required for general deterrence and denunciation, with a 15% discount for the manslaughter plea, backdating to 4 December 2002, a varied non-parole period, and concurrent sentences because the criminality of the second offence was...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 May 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Sentencing for Manslaughter and Being Armed With an Offensive Weapon in Company Assaulting With Intent to Rob / Sentence After Guilty Pleas
- Outcome
- The offender was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for both offences, with the sentences backdated to 4 December 2002 and ordered to run concurrently.
- Legal Topics
- ['manslaughter by Unlawful and Dangerous Act' 'armed Assault With Intent to Rob' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'objective Criminality' 'general Deterrence' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period' 'backdating Sentence' 'concurrency and Totality']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Manslaughter and Being Armed With an Offensive Weapon in Company Assaulting With Intent to Rob / Sentence After Guilty Pleas
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the offender should be sentenced on the basis that he carried and fired a gun during the robbery attempt.' "The objective criminality of the offender's participation in manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act." "The weight to be given to the offender's youth, antecedents, remorse, rehabilitation and guilty pleas." 'Whether imprisonment was the only appropriate sentencing option.' "Whether the sentences should be backdated to account for time in custody and the offender's remand status." 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the statutory proportion for the non-parole period and continued detention in a Detention Centre.' 'Whether the sentence for the offence against Mrs Lu should be concurrent with the manslaughter sentence.']
Ratio Decidendi
The offender's participation in an armed robbery attempt, knowing that knives would be presented, made him criminally responsible for manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act even though he was not proved to be the stabber or the person who fired the gun. His objective criminality was serious, but was moderated by his youth, role as a principal in the second degree, remorse, guilty pleas, rehabilitation prospects and special circumstances. Imprisonment was required for general deterrence and denunciation, with a 15% discount for the manslaughter plea, backdating to 4 December 2002, a varied non-parole period, and concurrent sentences because the criminality of the second offence was...
Court Disposition
The offender was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for both offences, with the sentences backdated to 4 December 2002 and ordered to run concurrently.
Orders
- ['On the charge of being armed with an offensive weapon, namely a knife, in company with others, assaulting Mrs Lu with intent to rob her, the offender is convicted and sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment for 15 months commencing on 4 December 2002 and expiring on 3 March 2004.' 'On the charge of manslaughter,...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment