NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Potts v R [2012] NSWCCA 229 Hearing dates: 16 March 2012 Decision date: 09 November 2012 Before: McClellan CJ at CL at [1] Johnson J at [3] Fullerton J at [188] Decision: Appeal against conviction dismissed. Grant leave to appeal against sentence, but appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction - murder - appellant kills woman in 2008 - appellant previously convicted of manslaughter of father in 2000 by reason of substantial impairment - evidence of 2000 manslaughter adduced before jury at trial for 2008 murder - whether defence counsel objected to evidence - whether Rule 4 Criminal Appeal Rules applies - nature of partial defence of substantial impairment - defence counsel did not press objection to evidence - Rule 4 applies - no error established - proviso applicable in any event - whether murder conviction unreasonable - whether appellant should have been convicted of manslaughter by reason of substantial impairment - ground rejected - appellant rightly convicted of murder - conviction appeal dismissed
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against sentence - murder - prior conviction for manslaughter - relevance of mental illness to sentence - paranoid schizophrenia - whether inappropriate weight given to general deterrence - whether sentence manifestly excessive - dangerousness and protection of the community - high risk of further violent conduct - no error demonstrated - sentence not manifestly excessive - sentence appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Evidence Act 1995 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 Criminal Appeal Rules Cases Cited: R v Potts [2001] NSWSC 753 Veen v The Queen [No. 2] [1988] HCA 14; 164 CLR 465 R v Potts [2010] NSWSC 731 R v Trotter (1993) 35 NSWLR 428 R v Ryan (1995) 90 A Crim R 191 R v Majdalawi [2000] NSWCCA 240; 113 A Crim R 241 R v Hucker [2002] NSWSC 1068 Dhanhoa v The Queen [2003] HCA 40; 217 CLR 1 R v FDP [2008] NSWCCA 317; 74 NSWLR 645 Shepherd v R [2011] NSWCCA 245 Abbosh v R; Bene v R [2011] NSWCCA 265 R v Abusafiah (1991) 24 NSWLR 531 R v Wilson [2005] NSWCCA 20; 62 NSWLR 346 TKWJ v The Queen [2002] HCA 46; 212 CLR 124 Ali v The Queen [2005] HCA 8; 214 ALR 1 Gilbert v The Queen [2000] HCA 15; 201 CLR 414 RWB v R [2010] NSWCCA 147; 202 A Crim R 209 M v The Queen [1994] HCA 63; 181 CLR 487 MFA v The Queen [2002] HCA 53; 213 CLR 606 Morris v The Queen [1987] HCA 50; 163 CLR 454 SKA v The Queen [2011] HCA 13; 243 CLR 400 The Queen v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; 228 CLR 618 The Queen v Keenan [2009] HCA 1; 236 CLR 397 Rasic v R [2009] NSWCCA 202 R v Welsh (1996) 90 A Crim R 364 R v Thompson [2005] NSWCCA 340; 156 A Crim R 467 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; 79 NSWLR 1 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 R v Fraser [2005] NSWCCA 77 R v Lo [2003] NSWCCA 313 Ta'ala v R [2008] NSWCCA 132 R v Wright (1997) 93 A Crim R 48 R v Hamid [2006] NSWCCA 302; 164 A Crim R 179 R v Mostyn [2004] NSWCCA 97 R v Ah-See [2004] NSWCCA 202 R v Achurch [2011] NSWCCA 186 R v Wickham [2004] NSWCCA 193 Rigby v R [2006] NSWCCA 205 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Director of Public Prosecutions v England [1999] VSCA 95; [1999] 2 VR 258 R v Wilkinson (No. 5) [2009] NSWSC 432 Fardon v Attorney General for the State of Queensland [2004] HCA 46; 223 CLR 575 R v Garforth (NSWCCA, 23 May 1994, unreported) Baxter v R [2007] NSWCCA 237; 173 A Crim R 284 Norrie v R [2008] NSWCCA 185 Texts Cited: --- Category: Principal judgment Parties: Malcolm Robert Potts (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Mr MC Ramage QC; Mr IS McLachlan (Appellant) Ms N Noman (Respondent) Peter Baker Solicitor (Appellant) Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent) File Number(s): 2009/6625 Publication restriction: --- Decision under appeal Citation: R v Potts [2010] NSWSC 731 (sentence) Before: Kirby J File Number(s): 2009/6625
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