Regina v Bishop [2002] NSWCCA 263

Regina v Bishop [2002] NSWCCA 263

The sentencing judge was entitled to find that the Hyundai driver did not contribute to the collision and to treat the consequences of three deaths and two severe permanent injuries as gravely aggravating. The Jurisic guideline did not require sentences of only three and two years; those figures were not controlling in a high-speed approach to traffic lights causing multiple deaths and serious injuries. Given the need for deterrence, the objective seriousness of the offending, the leniency inherent in concurrent rather than cumulative sentences, and the special circumstances reflected in relatively low non-parole periods, the sentences were within the proper exercise of sentencing...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / NSW Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal Granted and Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['dangerous Driving Occasioning Death' 'dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm' 'severity Appeal' 'general Deterrence' 'totality' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['dangerous Driving Occasioning Death' 'dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm' 'severity Appeal' 'general Deterrence' 'totality' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']

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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / NSW Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal Granted and Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences for dangerous driving occasioning three deaths and dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm to two persons were excessive.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in treating the tragic result of three deaths and two serious permanent injuries as an aggravating factor.' 'Whether the guideline judgment in R v Jurisic required lesser sentences of three years for dangerous driving occasioning death and two years for dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm.' 'Whether the concurrent sentences and non-parole periods reflected appropriate application of totality and special circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge was entitled to find that the Hyundai driver did not contribute to the collision and to treat the consequences of three deaths and two severe permanent injuries as gravely aggravating. The Jurisic guideline did not require sentences of only three and two years; those figures were not controlling in a high-speed approach to traffic lights causing multiple deaths and serious injuries. Given the need for deterrence, the objective seriousness of the offending, the leniency inherent in concurrent rather than cumulative sentences, and the special circumstances reflected in relatively low non-parole periods, the sentences were within the proper exercise of sentencing...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']