AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
Supreme Court 16 May 2025

R v Carlino

[2025] NSWSC 480

HomicideDomestic & family violence
CRIME SENTENCING MURDER PLEA OF GUILTY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFFENCE WHERE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Citation: R v Carlino [2025] NSWSC 480
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Date: 16 May 2025
Judge: McNaughton J

Background

The offender, a 37-year-old man, pleaded guilty to the murder of his 43-year-old domestic partner, who was killed at their shared home in Dural on the evening of 20 July 2022. The couple had been in an intermittent relationship for approximately 17 months prior to the killing. The victim had two young children from a previous relationship.

The relationship was described as tumultuous, marked by frequent hostility and argument. In the period leading up to the killing, the offender's mental state had deteriorated and his business was in decline. WhatsApp message exchanges in the days and hours before the death formed part of the agreed facts tendered at the sentencing hearing.

The offender entered his guilty plea in the Downing Centre Local Court in April 2024 and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. The sentence hearing ran across two part-days in February and April 2025.

  • What is the appropriate total sentence and non-parole period for a murder committed in a domestic violence context, where the offender pleaded guilty?
  • Whether a life sentence was warranted under s 61 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).
  • What weight should be given to general deterrence, denunciation, and community protection in domestic violence homicide sentencing?
  • Whether special circumstances existed to justify a departure from the standard non-parole period ratio.
  • What mitigating and aggravating factors were relevant to the sentencing exercise?

Decision

McNaughton J confirmed that a life sentence was not appropriate in this case. The Crown did not press for one, and the Court was not satisfied that the offender's culpability reached the extreme threshold required by s 61(1) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), which applies where the community's interests in retribution, punishment, community protection, and deterrence can only be met by a life term.

The Court applied the two-guidepost approach established in Muldrock v The Queen, treating both the maximum penalty of life imprisonment under s 19A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and the standard non-parole period of 20 years as important markers. McNaughton J emphasised, drawing on Munda v Western Australia and Quinn v R, that significant weight must be given to general deterrence, denunciation, and community protection where an offender takes a domestic partner's life. His Honour noted that community concern about women killed by male domestic partners has grown more acute in recent years.

The Court found that special circumstances existed, justifying a non-parole period below the standard statutory ratio. This finding reflected the need for an extended period of supervision on parole to support the offender's rehabilitation. Mitigating factors included the guilty plea and evidence of rehabilitative steps taken in custody, including completion of a domestic and family violence program, a dialectical behaviour program, and various educational courses. Psychiatric evidence from Dr Andrew Ellis was also before the Court.

Victim impact statements from the victim's mother and eldest child were read to the Court. McNaughton J acknowledged the profound and irreversible harm to the victim's family, including her two children, and recorded the Court's condolences.

Orders Made

  • Total sentence of 21 years' imprisonment for murder.
  • Non-parole period of 15 years, commencing 23 July 2022.
  • Additional term of 6 years, commencing 23 July 2037 and ending 22 July 2043.
  • The offender was directed to obtain legal advice regarding the potential consequences of the murder being classified as a "serious violence offence" under s 5A of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW).

Key Takeaways

  • In sentencing for domestic partner murder, significant weight attaches to general deterrence, denunciation, and community protection, and the sentence must accord due recognition to the human dignity of the victim of domestic violence, consistent with the High Court's guidance in Munda v Western Australia.
  • A finding of special circumstances under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) can justify a non-parole period that is proportionally lower than the statutory standard, where extended post-release supervision is warranted to support rehabilitation.
  • The standard non-parole period of 20 years for murder and the maximum of life imprisonment operate as statutory guideposts to be weighed alongside all relevant sentencing factors, not as presumptive outcomes.
  • Completion of rehabilitative programs in custody, including a domestic and family violence program, was treated as a relevant mitigating factor, though it did not displace the primacy of denunciation and deterrence in this category of offending.
  • A murder conviction in these circumstances constitutes a "serious violence offence" under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), with potential consequences that may arise at the conclusion of the sentence.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 19A
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A, 44, 54A, 61
- Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), s 5A

Cases
- Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
- Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
- Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38
- Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
- Quinn v R [2018] NSWCCA 297
- R v Tammajanta [2024] NSWSC 1180
- R v Ibrahim [2021] NSWCCA 296
- Williams v R [2022] NSWCCA 15
- R v Millwood [2012] NSWCCA 2
- R v Hillsley [2006] NSWCCA 312; (2006) 164 A Crim R 252
- Goodbun v R [2002] NSWCCA 77