HIT-AND-RUN DRIVER WHO KILLED A 2-YEAR-OLD CHILD SUCCESSFULLY APPEALS SENTENCE

Bullock v The Queen

[2020] SASCFC 86

This is an #appeal of the decision of the trial judge #sentencing offender with 4 years and 7 months imprisonment, on the basis that it is manifestly excessive. Offender was driving a motor vehicle which collided with a child, who died as a result of his injuries. Offender failed to stop, assist and present himself to police after the collision.

Facts: 

• At 8:00 pm on Sunday 12 February 2017, Mr. Bullock was driving a blue Kia Cerato motor vehicle on Branksome Terrace in Dover Gardens. He came from the supermarket to buy cigarettes.
• ZC (aged 2 years and 10 months) and his two older sisters (aged 5 and 7 years) were playing in the vicinity of their home on Branksome Terrace.
• When Mr. Bullock turned into Branksome Terrace, he was traveling along it at a speed of 35 kph. As he approached a tree on his left, he saw a little girl ran out from behind the tree onto the road. He swerved to the right to miss her and heard a noise at the front of the car. Something then went under his rear wheels. He stopped the vehicle and saw ZC lying on the road and panicked.
• Bullock did not get out of his vehicle following the collision, instead driving on to his home on an intersecting street, about 100 metres away from the collision.
• Following Mr. Bullock’s arrival home, his wife telephoned triple zero and reported the collision at 8:08 pm. The first police arrived at the scene at about 8:17 pm.
• ZC died as a result of his injuries.
• Bullock was charged with aggravated driving without due care (maximum penalty of 1 year imprisonment) and leaving the scene of an accident after causing death (maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment).
• Trial judge sentenced him to 7 months imprisonment on Count 1 and 4 years imprisonment on Count 2, to be served cumulatively. Thus, the head sentence was 4 years and 7 months imprisonment.
• Bullock appeals the sentence on the basis that it is manifestly excessive.

Issue: Was the sentence manifestly excessive?

Law:

In a survey of sentencing decisions similar to Count 2 “Leaving an Accident Scene” in the present case, a range of sentence from 1 year to 2 years imprisonment is quite discernible:

In R v Jongewaard, defendant was sentenced to two years imprisonment. The offending was aggravated by the fact that the appellant was to some extent affected by alcohol and that he did not stop at all.

In R v Thach, the case involved injuries caused through high speed “drag racing” on a public road with other complexities.

In R v Farrer, the defendant was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment. She hit a cyclist, causing the cyclist to be thrown back over the left side of the car, shattering the left windscreen, and without stopping, she left the cyclist on the roadway. She was found to have a significant blood level of methylamphetamine and also small quantities of other drugs.         

Analysis:

• A survey of sentencing decisions similar to Count 2 reveal that those at the higher range (with penalty of 2 years imprisonment) have features worse than appearing in the present case.
• While Mr. Bullock committed a serious offence by stopping only momentarily as he did, it should also be recognised that he did not have a mobile phone with him to call the police, and it was apparent to him that the children’s parents were already being called by the older sisters to attend to ZC.
• Moreover, following Mr. Bullock’s arrival home, his wife immediately telephoned triple zero and reported the collision.

Conclusion:

The cumulative sentence of 4 years imprisonment imposed on Count 2 was manifestly excessive and should be set aside It should be substituted with a sentence of 18 months imprisonment on Count 2 to be wholly cumulative upon the sentence of 7 months imprisonment on Count 1, thus constituting a new head sentence of 2 years and 1 month.