Turner v R [2011] NSWCCA 189

Turner v R [2011] NSWCCA 189

The sentencing judge erred by leaving the applicant's mental disorder out of account when assessing objective gravity and by treating his addiction to prescribed opioid medication as involving personal choice analogous to illicit drug addiction. His addiction arose from prescribed medication for serious injury and he had sought assistance to overcome it. Those errors, together with the applicant's mental state, reduced moral culpability and the weight to be given to deterrence, and the original sentence was manifestly excessive.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Sentence Appeal From District Court Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; District Court sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced.
Legal Topics
['robbery Whilst Armed With an Offensive Weapon' 'form 1 Offence of Stealing' 'plea of Guilty' 'mental Disorder and Sentencing' 'drug Addiction to Prescription Medication' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['robbery Whilst Armed With an Offensive Weapon' 'form 1 Offence of Stealing' 'plea of Guilty' 'mental Disorder and Sentencing' 'drug Addiction to Prescription Medication' 'general and Specific Deterrence' '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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Sentence Appeal From District Court Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to take the applicant's mental state into account in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence." "Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to take into account as a subjective factor that the applicant's addiction to prescription medication was not a matter of personal choice." 'Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by leaving the applicant's mental disorder out of account when assessing objective gravity and by treating his addiction to prescribed opioid medication as involving personal choice analogous to illicit drug addiction. His addiction arose from prescribed medication for serious injury and he had sought assistance to overcome it. Those errors, together with the applicant's mental state, reduced moral culpability and the weight to be given to deterrence, and the original sentence was manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; District Court sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal allowed, sentence imposed in the District Court quashed.' 'The applicant be sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years and 6 months commencing on 15 March 2010 and expiring on 14 September 2013, with a non-parole period of 1 year and 9 months, expiring on 14 December 2011.']