Sentencing offenders with impaired mental functioning: Developing Australia's "most sophisticated and subtle" analysis

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 187-201

  Walvisch, Jamie ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Culpability; Deterrence; Impaired mental functioning; Incapacitation; Mental illness; Mentally impaired offenders; Rehabilitation; Sentencing; Sentencing purposes

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952332116     PISSN: 13218719     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13218710903433949     Document Type: Article

References (272)

1. Senate Select Committee on Mental Health, 'A National Approach to Mental Health - From Crisis to Community: First Report' (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006) [13.1].
2. Notable exceptions to this include I Potas, Just Deserts for the Mad (Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra 1981).
3. C Slobogin, Minding Justice: Laws that Deprive People with Mental Disability of Lifeand Liberty(Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2006).
4. M Edgely, 'Common Law Sentencing of Mentally Impaired Offenders in Australian Courts: A Call for Coherence and Consistency' (2009) 16 Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 240.
5. See, eg, S Knaggs and Thomson Gale (Firm), Unsoundness of Mind Considered in Relation to the Question of Responsibility for Criminal Acts (J. Churchill, London 1854).
6. AS Goldstein, The Insanity Defense (Yale University Press, New Haven 1967).
7. CP Ewing, Insanity: Murder, Madness, and the Law (Oxford University Press, New York 2008).
8. See, eg, A Freiberg, 'The Disposition of Mentally Disordered Offenders in Australia: "Out of Mind, Out of Sight" Revisited' (1994) 1 Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 97.
9. See Edgely (n 2) for an overview of these cases.
10. This figure is based on an analysis of Victorian Supreme Court and Court of Appeal sentencing judgements reported between 31 July 2007 and 31 July 2009. The figure would be substantially higher if lower court judgements were also taken into account.
11. (2007) 16 VR 269.
12. I Freckelton, 'Sentencing Offenders with Impaired Mental Functioning: R v Verdins, Buckley and Vo' (2007) 14 Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 359, 362.
13. Freckelton (n 8) 359.
14. Quinn v Law Institute of Victoria Ltd [2007] VSCA 122.
15. Verdins (n 7) 271.
16. R v Parton [2007] VSCA 268.
17. Verdins (n 7).
18. Verdins (n 7) 271.
19. Verdins (n 7) 272.
20. Verdins (n 7) 271.
21. See, eg, R v Atik [2007] VSC 299.
22. R v Aggelidis [2008] VSC 445.
23. See, eg, R v Audino (2007) 180 A Crim R 371.
24. R v Tresize [2008] VSCA 8.
25. See, eg, R v Zander [2009] VSCA 10.
26. Director of Public Prosecutions v Fox [2009] VSC 189.
27. See, eg, R v Brooks [2008] VSC 70. Dysthymia is a form of ongoing mild depression.
28. See, eg, R v Curtain [2007] VSC 309.
29. R v Nguyen, Ho and Nguyen [2007] VSC 540.
30. See, eg, R v Laracy [2008] VSC 67.
31. R v McIntosh [2008] VSC 242.
32. See, eg, Director of Public Prosecutions v Felsbourg [2008] VSC 20.
33. R v Cheney [2009] VSC 154.
34. See, eg, R v Vo [2008] VSC 49.
35. Director of Public Prosecutions v Weidlich [2008] VSCA 203.
36. R v Elias [2007] VSCA 125.
37. R v Margach [2008] VSC 255.
38. See, eg, R v Martin [2007] VSCA 291.
39. Director of Public Prosecutions v Richardson [2007] VSC 221.
40. R v Howell (2007) 16 VR 349.
41. It should be noted that in other cases, such as R v Acuna [2008] VSC 351.
42. Aggelidis (n 16)
43. and R v Dao [2009] VSC 616, the court has found the Verdins principles to apply despite the fact that the offenders' impairments seem to have been drug-induced. Unfortunately, a detailed analysis of the complex law concerning
44. Self-induced illness is beyond the scope of this article. For an interesting discussion of the issue.
45. see B McSherry and others, 'Drug-Associated Psychoses and Criminal Responsibility' (2008) 26 Behavioural Sciences and the Law 633.
46. R v Baker [2008] VSC 390.
47. Director of Public Prosecutions v RLP [2008] VSC 381.
48. A person suffers from a "conversion disorder" if they have symptoms that affect their voluntary motor or sensory function, and which are suggestive of a neurologic or other general medical condition, but which are judged to be associated with psychological factors or stressors.
49. Verdins (n 7) 276.
50. See also R v Tsiaras (1996) 1 VR 398.
51. In Victoria, this is known as the defence of "mental impairment". A person will be not guilty by reason of mental impairment if he or she did not know the nature and quality of what he or she was doing, or did not know that his or her conduct was wrong (Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic) s 20).
52. Weidlich (n 24) [15].
53. See also R v Safatli [2008] VSCA 232.
54. R v Grossi [2008] VSCA 51 [55].
55. [2008] VSCA 127.
56. In reaching this decision, the court did not refer to Verdins.
57. Their decision was based on the cases of R v Ryan (2001) 206 CLR 267.
58. And Director of Public Prosecutions v OJA (2007) 172 A Crim R 181.
59. [2008] VSC 254 [28].
60. See also R v Farquharson [2007] VSC 469.
61. See, eg, Director of Public Prosecutions v EB [2008] VSCA 127.
62. Verdins (n 7).
63. R v Wise [2007] VSCA 266.
64. McIntosh (n 21).
65. Zander (n 18).
66. Verdins (n 7) 275.
67. [2007] VSC 540.
68. See, eg, Fox (n 18).
69. R v Oznek [2007] VSC 192.
70. R v JED [2007] VSC 348.
71. R v Williams [2007] VSC 490.
72. R v Do (2007) 180 A Crim R 338.
73. R v Strezovski [2007] VSCA 260.
74. R v Bunning [2007] VSCA 205.
75. R v Norris [2007] VSCA 241.
76. See, eg, Fox (n 18).
77. R v Baxter [2009] VSC 180.
78. Bunning (n 40).
79. Norris (n 40).
80. Strezovski (n 40).
81. Wise (n 37).
82. Williams (n 40).
83. See, eg, Williams (n 40).
84. Do (n 40).
85. Grossi (n 33).
86. R v Samia [2009] VSCA 5.
87. See, eg, R v Barrett [2008] VSC 234.
88. R v Dupuy [2008] VSCA 63.
89. R v Kerbatieh (2005) 155 A Crim R 367, 371.
90. This was hinted at by the court in R v Johnstone [2007] VSCA 193 [36].
91. [2008] VSC 254.
92. See also Director of Public Prosecutions v Nestorowycz [2008] VSC 385.
93. See, eg, R v Piper [2008] VSC 569.
94. Cheney (n 23).
95. Piper (n 47).
96. R v Fitchett [2008] VSC 258.
97. R v Imadonmwonyi [2008] VSCA 135.
98. The requirements for imposing a hospital security order are set out in Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 93A.
99. A person is punished for the purpose of "general deterrence" when the aim of the sentence is to induce other people who might be tempted to commit crime to desist out of fear of the penalty.
100. See, eg, A Von Hirsch and A Ashworth (eds), Principled Sentencing: Readings on Theory & Policy (2nd edn Hart Publishing, Portland 2004) Chapter 2.
101. Verdins (n 7).
102. It seems that judges may even be able to take into account an offender's projected state of mental health in determining whether to moderate the need for deterrence: see, eg, Fitchett (n 49).
103. R v Yaldiz [1998] 2 VR 376.
104. R v Matthews (2004) 145 A Crim R 445.
105. R v Champion (1992) 64 A Crim R 244.
106. R v Roadley (1990) 51 A Crim R 336.
107. R v Clarke [1996] 2 VR 520.
108. R v Richards and Gregory [1998] 2 VR 1.
109. Yaldiz (n 53).
110. R v Williams [2000] VSCA 174.
111. R v Bux [2002] VSCA 126.
112. R v Ulla (2004) 148 A Crim R 356.
113. Director of Public Prosecutions v Lovett [2008] VSCA 262.
114. McIntosh (n 21).
115. R v Wright (1997) 93 A Crim R 48.
116. Matthews (n 54).
117. R v Glascott [2008] VSC 236.
118. Parton (n 12) (Neave JA).
119. See, eg, Piper (n 47).
120. Dupuy (n 43).
121. See, eg, R v Derich [2009] VSC 160.
122. Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Rowson [2007] VSCA 176.
123. Parton (n 12).
124. Grossi (n 33).
125. R v Chong [2008] VSCA 119.
126. Parton (n 12).
127. EB (n 36).
128. R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67.
129. Fitchett (n 49) [38].
130. See also Engert (n 64).
131. R v Mooney (1978) 2 Crim LJ 351 (Lush J).
132. R v Mooney (n 66) (Young CJ).
133. See, eg, Quinn (n 10).
134. R v Arnott [2007] VSC 351.
135. Williams (n 40).
136. R v Slattery [2008] VSC 81.
137. R v Blaauw [2008] VSC 129.
138. Aggelidis (n 16).
139. Atik (n 16).
140. Felsbourg (n 22).
141. Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
142. Director of Public Prosecutions v McClelland [2008] VSCA 168.
143. Director of Public Prosecutions v McGill [2008] VSC 499.
144. Director of Public Prosecutions v Rolfe [2008] VSC 528.
145. A person is punished for the purpose of "specific deterrence" when the sentence aims to deter him or her from reoffending.
146. See, eg, Von Hirsch and Ashworth (eds) (n 51) Chapter 2.
147. See, eg, Bunning (n 40).
148. Quinn (n 10).
149. Howell (n 27).
150. R v Skura [2004] VSCA 53.
151. Howell (n 27).
152. Bunning (n 40).
153. McGill (n 67).
154. Curtain (n 20).
155. Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
156. Howell (n 27).
157. R v Jensen [2007] VSC 199.
158. Arnott (n 67).
159. But see Bunning (n 40).
160. Nguyen, Ho and Nguyen (n 20).
161. Parton (n 12).
162. Curtain (n 20).
163. Jensen (n 72).
164. Parton (n 12) (Neave JA).
165. Barrett (n 43).
166. Parton (n 12).
167. R v BF (2007) 117 A Crim R 331.
168. Parton (n 12).
169. McIntosh (n 21).
170. Dupuy (n 43).
171. See, eg, R v Smith (1987) 44 SASR 587.
172. R v Van Boxtel (2005) 11 VR 258.
173. R v RGG [2008] VSCA 94.
174. Zander (n 18) [31].
175. Zander (n 18).
176. See also Howell (n 27).
177. R v Curtain [2009] VSCA 38.
178. Blaauw (n 67).
179. Tresize (n 17).
180. Piper (n 47).
181. R v Puc [2008] VSCA 159.
182. See also Williams (n 40).
183. McGill (n 67).
184. R v Richardson [2008] VSCA 7.
185. Derich (n 61).
186. Brooks (n 19).
187. Nguyen, Ho and Nguyen (n 20).
188. R v Finlayson [2008] VSCA 50.
189. Aggelidis (n 16).
190. Atik (n 16).
191. Nguyen, Ho and Nguyen (n 20).
192. Arnott (n 67).
193. Fox (n 18).
194. R v Johnstone [2008] VSC 584.
195. Verdins (n 7).
196. See also R v Williams [2008] VSCA 95.
197. See, eg, Verdins (n 7).
198. Strezovski (n 40).
199. Dupuy (n 43).
200. R v Christopher [2007] VSCA 290.
201. Richardson (n 27).
202. Chong (n 61).
203. See, eg, Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
204. Margach (n 26).
205. R v Fagone [2008] VSCA 175.
206. Weidlich (n 24).
207. See also Fagone (n 93).
208. See, eg, Margach (n 26).
209. Cheney (n 23).
210. See, eg, Director of Public Prosecutions v Pennisi [2008] VSC 498.
211. See, eg, McIntosh (n 21).
212. R v Tran [2008] VSCA 80.
213. Margach (n 26).
214. R v Lodhi (2006) 199 FLR 364.
215. Atik (n 16).
216. See, eg, R v Benbrika [2009] VSC 21.
217. Howell (n 27) [25].
218. See, eg, Arnott (n 67).
219. Fitchett (n 49).
220. Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
221. See, eg, Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
222. Arnott (n 67).
223. Fitchett (n 49).
224. See, eg, Benbrika (n 101).
225. Benbrika (n 101).
226. In Benbrika, the court held that this was likely to be a breach of s 22(1) of the Charter, which states that: "All persons deprived of liberty must be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person."
227. Weidlich (n 24).
228. See, eg, Director of Public Prosecutions v Eli [2008] VSCA 209.
229. Curtain (n 20).
230. Director of Public Prosecutions v Ralph [2007] VSCA 305.
231. Norris (n 40).
232. Weidlich (n 24).
233. Oznek (n 40).
234. EB (n 36).
235. See, eg, Oznek (n 40).
236. See, eg, EB (n 36).
237. Curtain (n 20).
238. Curtain (n 20).
239. Norris (n 40).
240. R v Detenamo [2007] VSCA 160.
241. See, eg, Aggelidis (n 16).
242. Barrett (n 43).
243. Ralph (n 110).
244. See, eg, Curtain (n 20).
245. See, eg, Chong (n 61).
246. Norris (n 40).
247. Audino (n 17).
248. R v McKee (2003) 138 A Crim R 88.
249. Acuna (n 27).
250. R v Koumis [2008] VSCA 84.
251. See, eg, Aggelidis (n 16).
252. Koumis (n 116).
253. R v Proom [2003] SASC 88.
254. Cf. Veen v The Queen [No.1] (1979) 143 CLR 458.
255. Veen v The Queen [No.2] (1988) 164 CLR 465.
256. See, eg, Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
257. Oznek (n 40).
258. Curtain (n 20).
259. Cheney (n 23).
260. Imadonmwonyi (n 49) [33] (Nettle JA).
261. See, eg, Imadonmwonyi (n 49).
262. Cheney (n 23).
263. See, eg, Oznek (n 40).
264. EB (n 36) [16].
265. See also R v Rattya [2008] VSCA 149.
266. See, eg, BF (n 77).
267. Parton (n 12).
268. Barrett (n 43).
269. Veen v The Queen [No.1] (1979) 143 CLR 458.
270. Veen v The Queen [No.2] (1988) 164 CLR 465.
271. Edgely (n 2) 245.
272. Under the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 5, a person may be sentenced for one or more of the following purposes: just punishment, general or specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation, community protection.