In R v Carey [2024] QCA 69, Joshua Steven Carey applied for leave to appeal against his sentence in the Supreme Court of Queensland, Court of Appeal. Carey had been sentenced by the District Court at Maroochydore in November 2023 to concurrent sentences of 18 months and 3 years for burglary with property damage and grievous bodily harm, respectively, with parole eligibility after 12 months. His appeal was centred on claims that the sentencing judge undervalued the significance of his PTSD and alcohol abuse as mitigating factors. Specifically, Carey argued that these conditions diminished his culpability for the violence inflicted and were directly linked to his crimes.
However, the appellate court, led by Justices Mullins, Dalton, and Cooper, found no error in the initial sentencing judgment. They highlighted the sentencing judge's consideration of Carey's mental health but held that the seriousness of his crimes, particularly the violent and premeditated nature of the attack on a friend, outweighed those factors. The attempt to argue that the sentence was manifestly excessive was also rejected, emphasizing the weight given to the aggression and the decision to commit the crime over Carey's psychological conditions. The application for leave to appeal against the sentence was therefore refused, reinforcing the principle that while mental health conditions can influence sentencing, they do not absolve individuals of responsibility for serious and violent actions.