Thornton v R [2020] NSWCCA 257

Thornton v R [2020] NSWCCA 257

The applicant was granted an extension of time because uncontested affidavit evidence explained the delay and showed that he had abandoned and then revived the appeal because of advice concerning eligibility for a Reintegration Home Detention Order. The appeal was dismissed because, having regard to the applicant's high moral culpability, the serious and different injuries suffered by the two victims, and authority recognising that some accumulation is necessary where a single dangerous driving incident injures multiple victims, the aggregate sentence of 3 years and 8 months with a non-parole period of 2 years was not manifestly excessive and reflected the totality of the criminality.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm' 'manifest Excess' 'aggregate Sentence' 'notional Accumulation' 'concurrency and Totality' 'extension of Time']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm' 'manifest Excess' 'aggregate Sentence' 'notional Accumulation' 'concurrency and Totality' 'extension of Time']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time in which to seek leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Whether the aggregate sentence for two offences of dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm was manifestly excessive because of the notional accumulation of indicative sentences.' 'Whether the sentence properly reflected the totality of the criminality where a single act caused grievous bodily harm to two victims.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was granted an extension of time because uncontested affidavit evidence explained the delay and showed that he had abandoned and then revived the appeal because of advice concerning eligibility for a Reintegration Home Detention Order. The appeal was dismissed because, having regard to the applicant's high moral culpability, the serious and different injuries suffered by the two victims, and authority recognising that some accumulation is necessary where a single dangerous driving incident injures multiple victims, the aggregate sentence of 3 years and 8 months with a non-parole period of 2 years was not manifestly excessive and reflected the totality of the criminality.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Extend the time in which the Applicant may seek leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Grant the Applicant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal against sentence dismissed.']