Munda v The State of Western Australia [2013] HCA 38

The High Court has handed down its judgment in the case of Munda v State of Western Australian [2013] HCA 38, by majority dismissing an appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which had allowed an appeal against the original sentence imposed on Mr Ernest Munda for manslaughter, on the basis that it was manifestly inadequate. 

Background

The incident occurred on 12 July 2010. Mr Munda and his de facto spouse attended a local tavern, where both became intoxicated, and Mr Munda used some cannabis. Upon returning to their house, an argument developed, in which Mr Munda physically assaulted his partner.

The next morning, Mr Munda left the house, and noticed when he returned that his partner had stopped breathing. She was transported to hospital but was pronounced dead on arrival, with the cause of death being traumatic brain injury resulting from the assault. 

Proceedings

Mr Munda pleaded guilty to manslaughter and was sentenced in the Supreme Court of Western Australia to five years and three months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of three years and three months. The sentencing judge took into account Mr Munda's personal circumstances, noting that he was a traditional Aboriginal man who had been exposed to alcohol and family violence since childhood.

The Court of Appeal allowed the State's appeal against the sentence and resentenced Mr Munda to seven years and nine months imprisonment. 

High Court Appeal

Mr Munda appealed to the High Court on the grounds that the Court of Appeal failed to correctly apply the principles concerning State appeals against sentence, and that it failed to give proper regard to Mr Munda's personal circumstances.

By majority, the High Court upheld the Court of Appeal's decision that the original sentence was manifestly inadequate. They considered that, although an offender's circumstances of severe social disadvantage were a relevant factor to be taken into account, the same sentencing principles must nevertheless be applied in every case, irrespective of an offender's identity membership of any ethnic group. It was also found that the Court of Appeal did not err in not exercising its residual discretion .

TimeBase is an independent, privately owned Australian legal publisher specialising in the online delivery of accurate, comprehensive and innovative legislation research tools including LawOne and unique Point-in-Time Products.