R v White

[2009] VSCA 177

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Mitigating factors
4. › Mental impairment
5. › Borderline personality disorder
6. › Application of R v Verdins principles
7. › Whether sentencing judge required to consider mental condition where counsel failed to link condition to offending
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Duty of sentencing judge
4. › Represented offender
5. › Whether judge required to identify unargued mitigating factors
6. › Whether failure to make submissions on mental state constitutes sentencing error

Quick Take

Where an offender is represented by counsel, a sentencing judge is not required to consider possible effects of psychological or psychiatric disability other than those expressly relied on by counsel. Defence counsel must make specific submissions linking a diagnosed mental condition to the offending and to the relevant Verdins principles; failure to do so means the evidence of the condition is merely background and the sentencing judge does not err in attaching no mitigating weight to it.