R v Lester [2020] NSWDC 642

R v Lester [2020] NSWDC 642

Although reckless wounding was serious and involved actual use of a weapon in a home, the offence was well below the middle range of objective seriousness because it was unplanned, occurred after provocation and in excessive self-defence, and the offender stabbed the victim while retreating after the victim had stabbed him first. The offender pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity, had no significant prior convictions, was of good character, was remorseful, had mental health conditions causally connected to the offending, had good prospects of rehabilitation and was unlikely to re-offend. The imprisonment threshold was crossed, but a sentence of 1 year and 9 months could...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for Reckless Wounding Contrary to S 35(4) Crimes Act 1900 / Sentence After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 9 months to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order, commencing 19 June 2020, with supervision and community service conditions.
Legal Topics
['reckless Wounding' 'intensive Correction Order' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'self Defence' 'provocation' 'aboriginality' 'mental Health' 'plea of Guilty' 'rehabilitation' 'covid 19']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['reckless Wounding' 'intensive Correction Order' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'self Defence' 'provocation' 'aboriginality' 'mental Health' 'plea of Guilty' 'rehabilitation' 'covid 19']

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 Sentence for Reckless Wounding Contrary to S 35(4) Crimes Act 1900 / Sentence After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for reckless wounding contrary to s 35(4) Crimes Act 1900.' 'Whether the s 5 threshold for imprisonment under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 had been crossed.' 'Whether the custodial sentence should be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order rather than full-time custody.' 'How the standard non-parole period applied where no non-parole period could be fixed because the sentence was to be served by way of Intensive Correction Order.' 'The objective seriousness of the offence, including the injury, use of a weapon, offending in a home, provocation and excessive self-defence.' "The relevance of the offender's plea of guilty, limited criminal history, good character, remorse, prospects of rehabilitation, mental health, alcohol dependence and Aboriginality."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although reckless wounding was serious and involved actual use of a weapon in a home, the offence was well below the middle range of objective seriousness because it was unplanned, occurred after provocation and in excessive self-defence, and the offender stabbed the victim while retreating after the victim had stabbed him first. The offender pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity, had no significant prior convictions, was of good character, was remorseful, had mental health conditions causally connected to the offending, had good prospects of rehabilitation and was unlikely to re-offend. The imprisonment threshold was crossed, but a sentence of 1 year and 9 months could...

Court Disposition

Sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 9 months to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order, commencing 19 June 2020, with supervision and community service conditions.

Orders

  • ['In relation to the offence to which the offender pleaded guilty, there being no other appropriate penalty, he was sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 9 months.' 'Pursuant to s 7(1) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, the sentence is to be served by way of Intensive Correction Order commencing 19 June...