AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
2
Supreme Court 2 December 2016

R v Quinn (No 3)

[2016] NSWSC 1699

Homicide
SENTENCING MURDER WHETHER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES HELD IMPRISONMENT FOR TWENTY YEARS NON PAROLE PERIOD OF FIFTEEN YEARS

Citation: R v Quinn (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 1699
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Date: 2 December 2016
Judge: Beech-Jones J

Background

Michael James Quinn was convicted of the murder of Cherie Vize, his 25-year-old ex-girlfriend, following a judge-alone trial in September 2016. Quinn and Vize had been in an on-and-off relationship since 2010, but Vize had ended the relationship in mid-July 2013 and had begun a new relationship with another man. Quinn, who suffered from borderline personality disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder, could not accept the separation.

On 22 July 2013, at the family home in Farmborough Heights near Wollongong, Quinn seized a knife from the kitchen and attacked Vize in the front yard. She suffered defensive wounds and multiple wounds to her neck before Quinn fatally stabbed her, severing her carotid artery and jugular vein. Quinn then stabbed himself in the chest and neck with a second knife. The self-inflicted neck wound rendered him a quadriplegic.

The sentencing proceedings addressed the full range of factors bearing on the appropriate penalty, including Quinn's serious physical disability, his mental health conditions, the question of whether he had already suffered extra-curial punishment (that is, punishment outside the formal justice system), and whether the standard sentencing framework applied given his exceptional circumstances.

  • Whether a life sentence was warranted under s 61(1) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
  • What weight to give the standard non-parole period of 20 years for murder under the Muldrock framework
  • The extent to which Quinn's borderline personality disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder reduced his moral culpability for the offence
  • Whether Quinn's self-inflicted quadriplegia constituted extra-curial punishment warranting a reduction in sentence
  • Whether imprisonment was more burdensome for Quinn given his disability, and if so, how that affected the sentence
  • Whether special circumstances existed justifying a departure from the standard ratio between the non-parole period and the total sentence

Decision

Beech-Jones J was not satisfied that Quinn's culpability was so extreme as to warrant a life sentence, and no submission to that effect was made by the Crown. His Honour worked through the full range of relevant factors under the Muldrock framework, treating the standard non-parole period of 20 years and the maximum penalty as legislative guideposts rather than fixed starting or end points.

The court accepted that Quinn's mental health conditions, particularly his borderline personality disorder, contributed meaningfully to his offending. His disorder fuelled his inability to accept the end of the relationship and his obsessive preoccupation with Vize's new partner. However, the court found that his conditions did not deprive him of substantial moral culpability for a sustained, lethal attack on a defenceless young woman who had suffered additional wounds attempting to defend herself.

On the question of extra-curial punishment, the court accepted that Quinn's quadriplegia, caused by his own hand, represented a form of punishment he had effectively inflicted on himself. The court also accepted that imprisonment was materially more burdensome for Quinn as a quadriplegic than it would be for an able-bodied person, given his dependence on others for basic physical care and his limited ability to participate in prison programs. These factors were taken into account in the overall sentencing exercise.

The court declined to find special circumstances sufficient to alter the standard ratio between the non-parole period and the balance of the sentence beyond the adjustment already reflected in the orders made. Quinn's prospects of rehabilitation were considered in this context, tempered by the gravity of the offence and the legitimate sentencing objectives of punishment, deterrence, and community protection.

Orders Made

  • Total term of imprisonment: 20 years
  • Non-parole period: 15 years, commencing 9 September 2015
  • Additional term: 5 years, commencing 9 September 2030 and ending 8 September 2035
  • Eligible for release on parole: 9 September 2030
  • Sentence expires: 8 September 2035
  • The court noted the offence is a "serious violence offence" under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) and informed Quinn of the existence and application of that legislation

Key Takeaways

  • Quadriplegia self-inflicted immediately after a murder can constitute extra-curial punishment and can make imprisonment more burdensome, and both considerations are relevant factors in the sentencing exercise, though they do not operate as fixed discounts.
  • A diagnosed mental illness such as borderline personality disorder may reduce an offender's moral culpability where it demonstrably contributed to the offending, but it does not eliminate culpability for a deliberate and lethal act of violence.
  • Under the Muldrock framework, the standard non-parole period for murder (20 years) functions as a legislative guidepost, not a mandatory starting point; the sentencing court identifies all relevant factors and weighs them holistically.
  • Imprisonment that is materially more onerous due to an offender's physical disability is a recognised consideration in NSW sentencing, reflecting the principle that equivalent sentences should impose equivalent burdens so far as practicable.
  • The Supreme Court confirmed its obligation under s 25C of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) to notify an offender convicted of a serious violence offence of the existence and potential application of that legislation.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 19A (murder; maximum penalty)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 44, 61(1), Division 1A Item 1, s 21A
- Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 132(2) (judge-alone trial)
- Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), ss 5A, 25C

Cases
- Muldrock v R [2011] HCA 39; 244 CLR 120
- Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357
- R v Quinn (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 1244 (principal judgment on verdict)
- Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Quinn [2015] NSWSC 1326
- DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
- R v Olbrich [1999] HCA 54; 199 CLR 270
- Aktar v R [2015] NSWCCA 123
- Betts v R [2015] NSWCCA 39
- Christodoulou v R [2008] NSWCCA 102
- Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282
- R v Daetz [2003] NSWCCA 216
- R v Fidow [2004] NSWCCA 172
- R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255
- R v Maglovski (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 16
- R v Pearson [2004] NSWCCA 129
- R v Smith (1987) 44 SASR 587
- Street v Queensland Bar Association (1989) 168 CLR 461