R v Sullivan [2018] NSWDC 366
The offender's forceful punch to Mr McKay while Mr McKay was on the ground caused extensive and ongoing grievous bodily harm and was assessed as in the middle of the range of objective seriousness. The offending was not properly characterised as provoked and a sentence of two years or less would not reflect the objective gravity of the misconduct. Although the offender had no relevant criminal history, was otherwise of good character, pleaded guilty, and had special circumstances arising from his first time in custody and need for parole supervision, only full-time imprisonment was appropriate, with a non-parole period of two years and a head sentence of four years.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 October 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Guilty Plea to Recklessly Causing Grievous Bodily Harm
- Outcome
- The offender was sentenced to imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of 2 years and a head sentence of 4 years.
- Legal Topics
- ['recklessly Causing Grievous Bodily Harm' 'objective Seriousness' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'full Time Custody' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'parity' 'special Circumstances' 'victim Impact']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Guilty Plea to Recklessly Causing Grievous Bodily Harm
Legal Issues
- 1 ["What sentence should be imposed for the offender's reckless causing of grievous bodily harm." "Whether the offender's late guilty plea warranted a discount greater than 10%." 'Whether the offending was properly characterised as provoked.' "Whether parity with the offender's friends affected the sentence." 'Whether special circumstances justified an extended period of supervision on parole.']
Ratio Decidendi
The offender's forceful punch to Mr McKay while Mr McKay was on the ground caused extensive and ongoing grievous bodily harm and was assessed as in the middle of the range of objective seriousness. The offending was not properly characterised as provoked and a sentence of two years or less would not reflect the objective gravity of the misconduct. Although the offender had no relevant criminal history, was otherwise of good character, pleaded guilty, and had special circumstances arising from his first time in custody and need for parole supervision, only full-time imprisonment was appropriate, with a non-parole period of two years and a head sentence of four years.
Court Disposition
The offender was sentenced to imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of 2 years and a head sentence of 4 years.
Orders
- ['The offender is sentenced to imprisonment.' 'A non-parole period of two years is set to date from 25 October 2018.' 'A head sentence of four years is imposed.' 'The non-parole period will expire on 24 October 2020, upon which day the offender is eligible to be released to parole.']
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