Charges: Wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm x 1.
Appeal type: Appeal against sentence.
Facts: The victim was the appellant’s brother in law. The victim had hit the appellant’s sister, apparently accidentally, in a scuffle outside a nightclub. The appellant’s sister told her that the victim had hit her, but she did not tell her that it was an accident. The appellant followed the victim to a train station and stabbed him in the neck with a broken bottle ().
The appellant pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 2 years and 3 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 1 year and 2 months.
Issues: Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.
Decision and Reasoning: The appeal was dismissed. The appellant argued that the trial judge failed to take sufficient account of her background as a victim of domestic violence by her stepfather growing up (). It was also submitted that the appellant was subject to domestic violence by her husband, whose death she was still mourning at the time of the offending (). Further, the trial judge made no mention of the fact that her daughter would be left without a parent if the appellant was sentenced to imprisonment ().
The Court of Appeal (Bathurst CJ, R A Hulme and Beech-Jones JJ) emphasised that a trial judge cannot carefully consider their remarks while delivering an ex tempore judgement. If a trial judge does not mention a particular factor, that does not mean that they have not had regard to it (). Even though the trial judge did not specifically mention the factors raised by the appellant, it was evident that the trial judge adopted a sympathetic approach to sentencing while having regard to the maximum sentence and current sentencing practices (-).