The Queen v. Kolosovs, L.M. [1994] FCA 830

The Queen v. Kolosovs, L.M. [1994] FCA 830

The sentence was manifestly inadequate because the respondent deliberately took a knife into a willingly accepted fight, deliberately used it in an unlawful and dangerous assault, and caused death by stabbing the unarmed victim. On the evidence, a finding that she intended to inflict grievous bodily harm, or at least adverted to the probability that such harm was likely, would have been inevitable if the Crown submission had been accepted, placing the offence within the more serious category of manslaughter. The original sentence did not reflect the seriousness of the offence, and mitigation was limited to youth, family background, and the guilty plea.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 November 1994
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Leniency of Sentence for Manslaughter / Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence set aside; respondent resentenced to imprisonment for seven years with a non-parole period of three years, six months dating from 18 May 1994.
Legal Topics
['manslaughter' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'intention to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['manslaughter' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'intention to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm' '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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Leniency of Sentence for Manslaughter / Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentence of four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years for manslaughter was manifestly inadequate." "Whether the respondent's culpability should be assessed by reference to an intention to cause grievous bodily harm, or advertence to the probability that such harm was likely." 'Whether the offence fell within the more serious category of manslaughter.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence was manifestly inadequate because the respondent deliberately took a knife into a willingly accepted fight, deliberately used it in an unlawful and dangerous assault, and caused death by stabbing the unarmed victim. On the evidence, a finding that she intended to inflict grievous bodily harm, or at least adverted to the probability that such harm was likely, would have been inevitable if the Crown submission had been accepted, placing the offence within the more serious category of manslaughter. The original sentence did not reflect the seriousness of the offence, and mitigation was limited to youth, family background, and the guilty plea.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence set aside; respondent resentenced to imprisonment for seven years with a non-parole period of three years, six months dating from 18 May 1994.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be allowed.' 'The sentence imposed be set aside and in substitution therefor the respondent be sentenced to imprisonment for seven years and that a non-parole period of three years, six months be fixed.' 'The head sentence and non-parole period date from 18 May 1994.']