Patrick v R; Whitney v R [2020] NSWCCA 63

Patrick v R; Whitney v R [2020] NSWCCA 63

The sentencing judge did not err in finding the offence of reckless wounding in company to be of mid-range seriousness and aggravated by planning; both applicants shared equivalent legal and moral culpability and the sentences (except for the commencement date for Whitney) were within discretionary bounds. An arithmetical error was made in the calculation of Whitney's commencement date, requiring correction.

Parties
Applicant: Shane Patrick; Applicant: Ainsley Whitney; Respondent: Regina (Crown)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave granted; Patrick's appeal dismissed; Whitney's appeal allowed to correct commencement date of sentence
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Sentence, Reckless Wounding in Company, Objective Seriousness, Planning as Aggravation, Manifest Excess, Parity Principle, Calculation of Commencement Date
Criminal Law Appeal Against Sentence Reckless Wounding in Company Objective Seriousness Planning as Aggravation Manifest Excess Parity Principle Calculation of Commencement Date

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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shane Patrick

Applicant

Ainsley Whitney

Applicant

Regina (Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sentencing judge erred in assessment of objective seriousness of reckless wounding in company
  2. 2 Whether sentencing judge erred in finding aggravation by planning
  3. 3 Whether sentences were manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in finding the offence of reckless wounding in company to be of mid-range seriousness and aggravated by planning; both applicants shared equivalent legal and moral culpability and the sentences (except for the commencement date for Whitney) were within discretionary bounds. An arithmetical error was made in the calculation of Whitney's commencement date, requiring correction.

Court Disposition

Leave granted; Patrick's appeal dismissed; Whitney's appeal allowed to correct commencement date of sentence

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal to both applicants.
  • Dismiss the appeal of Shane Patrick.