Goodridge v R [2014] NSWCCA 37

Goodridge v R [2014] NSWCCA 37

The conviction appeal failed because it was open to the trial judge, considering the totality of the evidence, to find that the applicant had not proved substantial impairment by abnormality of mind. The ERISPs, taken within two days of the offence, and lay evidence of alcohol-related aggression significantly undermined the psychiatric opinions, particularly because the experts had not viewed the ERISPs or had access to important lay and autopsy evidence. It was open to find that any substantial impairment resulted from self-induced intoxication superimposed on underlying brain damage, not from the underlying condition alone, and that liability for murder should not be reduced to...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction Appeal and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From a Special Hearing for Murder / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision
Outcome
Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'special Hearing Before Judge Alone' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'self Induced Intoxication' 'expert Psychiatric Evidence' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'procedural Fairness' 'limiting Term' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health and Forensic Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['murder' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'special Hearing Before Judge Alone' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'self Induced Intoxication' 'expert Psychiatric Evidence' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'procedural Fairness' 'limiting Term' 'manifest Excess']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Conviction Appeal and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From a Special Hearing for Murder / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdict that the appellant committed murder was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence because the partial defence of substantial impairment under s23A of the Crimes Act 1900 was made out.' 'Whether the trial judge erred by not directing herself that unanimous expert evidence should not be rejected unless contradicted by other persuasive evidence.' 'Whether there was a miscarriage of justice or denial of procedural fairness because the trial judge did not invite further expert evidence after raising concerns about the psychiatric reports.' 'Whether the limiting term of 18 years was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction appeal failed because it was open to the trial judge, considering the totality of the evidence, to find that the applicant had not proved substantial impairment by abnormality of mind. The ERISPs, taken within two days of the offence, and lay evidence of alcohol-related aggression significantly undermined the psychiatric opinions, particularly because the experts had not viewed the ERISPs or had access to important lay and autopsy evidence. It was open to find that any substantial impairment resulted from self-induced intoxication superimposed on underlying brain damage, not from the underlying condition alone, and that liability for murder should not be reduced to...

Court Disposition

Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['In relation to the conviction appeal, the appeal be dismissed.' 'In relation to the application for leave to appeal against sentence, leave to appeal be granted but the appeal be dismissed.']