Aggravating features - causing death by dangerous driving - drug abuse - guilty pleas - sentence length - insight into mental illness - cannabis
R v David Whitnall: CA (Crim Div) (Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Davis, Mr Justice Tugendhat):
19 September 2006
The appellant (W) appealed against a sentence of six years' imprisonment and disqualification from driving for ten years following his guilty plea to causing death by dangerous driving, contrary to section 1 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
W had been driving erratically at speeds of up to 120mph on a motorway for approximately 50 miles, weaving in and out of traffic lanes. The deceased was hit in her car from behind, propelling the vehicle 170 metres down the motorway. Three other vehicles were involved in the crash, and W's car came to rest in a ditch.
Samples were taken from W and traces of cannabis were found in his bloodstream. W had a passenger in his vehicle who stated that W had been hallucinating and claiming that cows and lorries were chasing him.
The sentencing judge stated that W had been a heavy cannabis user since his teens and that his case highlighted the link between cannabis abuse and mental health problems. W was diagnosed as suffering from mania and psychosis.
W submitted that the sentence was manifestly excessive and that the judge failed to take sufficient account of his plea of guilty, mitigating features and his reduction in culpability owing to his mental illness. He argued that there was only one aggravating feature, and he should therefore not have been sentenced as though the case represented one of the worst cases.
Held, the basis on which the judge had sentenced W was correct and a sentence of six years' imprisonment was appropriate.
W's cannabis abuse both masked and triggered his mental illness. However, he could not argue that he should have reduced culpability on the basis of a lack of insight into his mental health status. He had sought help from his doctor for his mental health issues only days before the accident, and his guilty plea clearly indicated that he accepted culpability. There was more than one aggravating feature (R v Cooksley (Robert Charles) (2003) EWCA Crim 996, (2003) 2 Cr App R 18 followed).
W had consumed drugs, disregarded warnings from a fellow passenger, embarked on a prolonged, persistent and deliberate course of very bad driving, knew he was deprived of adequate sleep, and was driving when knowingly suffering from a medical condition that severely impaired his driving skills. He also had two previous convictions for speeding.
Appeal dismissed.
A Nuttall for the applellant; P Palmer for the Crown.
No comments yet