NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Regina v Read [2010] NSWCCA 78 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 2 March 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 3 May 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA at 1; Hulme J at 70; Latham J at 71
DECISION: (1) Appeal allowed. (2) Set aside the sentences of imprisonment to be served by way of periodic detention imposed by Robison DCJ. (3) Sentence the respondent: For the offence involving grievous bodily harm to Ms Minzevska, to imprisonment for a non-parole period of 14 months commencing on 3 May 2010 with a balance of term of 1 year; For the offence involving grievous bodily harm to Ms Lei, to imprisonment for a non-parole period of 11 months commencing on 3 November 2010 with a balance of term of 1 year; The respondent will be eligible for release to parole on 2 October 2011.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Crown appeal on sentence - dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm - injury to two persons resulting from the same dangerous driving - whether imprisonment for concurrent non-parole periods of 12 months served by periodic detention manifestly inadequate - need for some accumulation where two persons harmed as result of one act of dangerous driving - complete concurrency does not recognise the total criminality - periodic detention inappropriate - need to adhere to the guideline judgment in R v Whyte,
Application of Attorney-General (No 3 of 2002) [2004] NSWCCA 303; (2004) 61 NSWLR 305; Dinsdale v The Queen [2000] HCA 54; (2000) 202 CLR 321; Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; Nguyen v R [2007] NSWCCA 14; R v AA [2006] NSWCCA 55; R v Baker [2000] NSWCCA 85; R v Burnett (1996) 85 A Crim R 76; R v Cahayadi [2007] NSWCCA 1; R v Carr [2002] NSWCCA 434; (2002) 135 A Crim R 171; R v Carruthers [2008] NSWCCA 59; R v Hallocoglu (1992) 29 NSWLR 67; R v Hammoud [2000] NSWCCA 540; (2000) 118 A Crim R 66; R v Hersi [2010] NSWCCA 57; CASES CITED : R v Janceski [2005] NSWCCA 288; R v Jurisic (1998) 45 NSWLR 209; R v JW [2010] NSWCCA 39; R v McVittie [2002] NSWCCA 344; R v MD [2005] NSWCCA 342; (2005) 156 A Crim R 372; R v Pangallo (CCA, 13 August 1991, unreported); R v Price [2004] NSWCCA 186; R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284; R v Romanic [2000] NSWCCA 524; R v Wall [2002] NSWCCA 42; R v Whyte [2002] NSWCCA 343; (2002) 55 NSWLR 252; R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 115; R v Zamagias [2002] NSWCCA 17; TG v R [2010] NSWCCA 28.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate