‘Not persuaded’; Hobart judge dismisses sentence appeal for man convicted of choking, abusing partner

A Tasmanian man who choked his former partner and abused both her and her daughter has been denied in his attempt to reduce his time in jail. Here’s why.

Supreme Court of Tasmania, Hobart. Picture: Chris Kidd

A man convicted of assaulting and emotionally abusing his former partner has lost a sentence appeal bid, with a Hobart judge stating his 12-month prison sentence “adequately reflected” the charges and man’s rehabilitation efforts.

Samuel John Miller, 34, pleaded guilty in June this year to two charges of assault, one charge of emotional abuse or intimidation and one charge of breaching bail in Hobart’s Magistrates Court.

The offences occurred during Miller’s two-year relationship with his partner, where on one occasion Miller grabbed the partner by the throat and, on another, he verbally abused the partner and her daughter.

Magistrate Jackie Hartnett convicted Miller and sentenced him to 12 months’ imprisonment which commenced on April 20.

Magistrate Hartnett suspended three months of the sentence if he committed no offences for three years and complied with a community correction order.

However, Miller and his counsel appealed the sentence on the grounds that the “sentence imposed was manifestly excessive in all the circumstances”.

A man has lost his sentence appeal bid after Supreme Court of Tasmania Acting Justice David Porter upheld an April 12-month prison sentence.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Acting Justice David Porter dismissed the motion to appeal last week, publishing his reasons on Monday.

He said Miller’s 12-month prison sentence gave weight to Miller’s “quite appalling” offending, his rehabilitation and early-plea efforts and deterring domestic violence.

“The applicant needs to show that the sentence was manifestly excessive in the sense of being unreasonable or plainly unjust,” he said.

“It is not a question of what I might have done in the same circumstances, and it is not a question of whether some might think the sentence is too harsh.

“The question is whether the sentence is outside the permissible range of options available in the circumstances.

“Having regard to the nature and extent of the totality of the conduct involved, the applicant’s recorded history of relevant offending and the clear statements by appellate courts in relation to the weight to be given to deterrence and denunciation in matters such as these, I am not persuaded that the sentence should be disturbed.

“As I have said, the applicant was entitled to some credit for his efforts towards rehabilitation and the potential in that regard, and for his pleas of guilty.

“However, I think those matters were adequately reflected in the suspension of three months of the 12 month sentence, and the community correction order with the special conditions directed to a broad range of rehabilitative measures.”

Originally published as ‘Not persuaded’; Hobart judge dismisses sentence appeal for man convicted of choking, abusing partner