Significant Reduction in Sentence on District Court Severity Appeal; Dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm, Police Pursuit

JM was initially charged with a number of serious driving-related offences, namely, ‘Police pursuit- not stop- drive dangerously’, contrary to section 51B(1) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Exceed speed over 20km/h’, contrary to section 20 Road Rules 2014, ‘Dangerously driving occasioning grievous bodily harm’, contrary to section 52A(3)(c) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Negligent driving occasioning grievous bodily harm’, contrary to section 117(1)(b) Road Transport Act 2013, ‘Cause bodily harm by misconduct’, contrary to section 53 Crimes Act 1900, ‘Owner not disclose identity of driver or passenger’, contrary to section 17(1) Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 and ‘Not give particulars to police’, contrary to section 287(1) Road Rules 2014.

Pleas of guilty were entered to the charges of ‘Police pursuit- not stop- drive dangerously’, ‘Excess speed’, ‘Cause bodily harm, in charge of motor vehicle‘, and ‘Aggravated dangerous driving’. The remaining charges were withdrawn. JM was sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years.

Chris Cole lodged a Severity Appeal in the District Court on JM’s behalf. An updated Sentence Assessment Report was ordered and the matter was adjourned for further Hearing and determination. The Severity Appeal was then listed for Judgment, on which occasion the Judge allowed the appeal, re-sentencing JM to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years, 6 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.

This is a significant reduction in sentence and a very pleasing result for JM.    

Not Guilty Pursuant to Mental Health Act

AD was charged with ‘Wound person with intent to cause grievous bodily harm’, contrary to section 33(1) Crimes Act 1900; and ‘Reckless wounding’, contrary to section 35(4) Crimes Act 1900.

Chris Cole represented AD in these matters. AD was found not fit to plead or stand trial after having been assessed by both a clinical Neuropsychologist and a Forensic Psychiatrist. It was determined that the accused was suffering from schizophrenia at the time of offending with severe psychotic symptoms.

Subsequently, AD was found not guilty on the grounds of mental illness. This is a pleasing result considering the seriousness of the offence and allows AD to continue to access the psychological treatment he requires.