Wilmot v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 278

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: Wilmot v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 278

HEARING DATE(S): 20 August 2007

JUDGMENT DATE: 28 September 2007

JUDGMENT OF: Santow JA at 1; Hidden J at 2; Howie J at 35

DECISION: Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - malicious wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm - using offensive weapon with intent to prevent lawful apprehension - offender mentally ill - adequacy of evidence of connection between mental illness and offences

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900

R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 CASES CITED: Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705 R v Edigarov (2001) 125 A Crim R 551

PARTIES: Mark Wilmot (applicant) Regina (respondent)

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2006/4953

COUNSEL: C Davenport SC (applicant) M Hobart (Crown)

SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Commission (applicant) Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (respondent)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 04/21/0256

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Delaney DCJ

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 2006/4953

SANTOW JA HIDDEN J HOWIE J

Friday 28 September 2007 Mark Wilmot v Regina Judgment 1 SANTOW JA: I agree with Hidden J. 2 HIDDEN J: The applicant, Mark Wilmot, pleaded guilty in the District Court to the following charges: (1) Malicious wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm, an offence under s33 of the Crimes Act which carries a maximum sentence of imprisonment for twenty-five years and a standard non-parole period of seven years; (2) Using an offensive weapon with intent to prevent lawful apprehension, an offence under s33B of the Act which carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment for twelve years. 3 On the charge of using an offensive weapon with intent to prevent lawful apprehension, he was sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment for three years, dating from 7 July 2004. On the charge of malicious wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm, he was sentenced to imprisonment for eleven years, dating from 7 January 2005, comprising a non-parole period of seven years and a balance of term of four years. The overall sentence, then, was imprisonment for eleven-and-a-half years with an effective non-parole period of seven-and-a-half years. He seeks leave to appeal against those sentences.