Fleet v Leeson (No 3) - [2023] ACTSC 206

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	Fleet v Leeson (No 3)
Citation:	[2023] ACTSC 206
Hearing Date:	1 August 2023
Decision Date:	1 August 2023
Before:	McCallum CJ
Decision:	In respect of each good behaviour order imposed by me on 20 June 2022, I cancel those orders and resentence the offender to an intensive correction order for each charge for a period of 12 months from 1 August 2023 to 31 July 2024, subject to the core conditions listed in s 42 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) and the following additional conditions: (a) That the offender undertakes any counselling, treatment and programs as directed by the Director-General of ACT Corrective Services or their delegate particularly regarding drug relapse prevention and mental health. (b) That within 7 days the offender contact the EveryMan Program and further that he undertake any course of treatment or counselling recommended by the officer in charge of that program. (c) That within 7 days the offender contact his general practitioner and make an appointment to resume his mental health care plan if so recommended. (d) That the offender inform the Director-General of ACT Corrective Services or their delegate within 2 days in the case that his employment at Fenway Public House comes to an end.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – sentence – breach of a good behaviour order – cancellation of previous good behaviour order and resentencing to intensive corrections order – consideration of whether the importance of upholding orders of the Court should properly give way to the interests of rehabilitation
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 42, 65, 110
Cases Cited:	Fleet v Leeson [2021] ACTSC 153 Fleet v Leeson (No 2) [2022] ACTSC 150 Guy v Anderson [2013] ACTSC 5 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 R v XXL [2022] ACTSC 24
Parties:	Eliott John Fleet ( Appellant) Dean Leeson ( First Informant) Keira Seton (Second Informant)
Representation:	Counsel T Crispin (Appellant) D Swan (Respondents)
Solicitors InPrivate Law ( Appellant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondents)
File Number:	SCA 16 of 2021

McCALLUM CJ:

1․On 23 April 2021, Eliott Fleet was dealt with by the Magistrates Court for a series of offences committed over 2020 and early 2021, importantly including, on 8 January 2021, the serious offence of attempting to escape from lawful custody and resisting a territory official.
2․The offence on that date was committed when, during the hearing of an application for bail, Mr Fleet became angry, threw a box of tissues at the magistrate and attempted to leave the custody of the corrective services officers who had brought him to Court.
3․The magistrate who dealt with Mr Fleet on 23 April 2021 sentenced him to a relatively stern term of imprisonment, being a period of 28 months with a non-parole period of 20 months in aggregate for all of the offences for which he was dealt with.
4․Justice…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Fleet v Leeson (No 3)

Details

AGLC: Fleet v Leeson (No 3) [2023] ACTSC 206
Case: [2023] ACTSC 206
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Fleet v Leeson (No 3) involves Eliott John Fleet, who has a history of breaches of good behaviour orders imposed by the court, most recently for an offence committed on 15 October 2022, consisting of a breach of a family violence order. The case was heard by McCallum CJ in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The court had to decide whether, in light of Mr Fleet's demonstrated progress towards rehabilitation, it should impose the original suspended sentence of imprisonment or re-sentence him to an alternative punishment.

The legal issues revolved around the appropriate balance to strike between upholding the integrity of the court's orders and the interests of rehabilitation, particularly given Mr Fleet's significant strides towards rehabilitation. The court had to consider the principles of individualised justice, the factors relevant to sentencing, and the absence of a presumption in favour of imposing the original sentence upon a breach of a good behaviour order. The decision also had to be consistent with the provisions of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT).

McCallum CJ held that while breaching a good behaviour order is a serious matter, it is but one factor to be weighed in the sentencing process. Other relevant factors include the offender's experience since the original sentence was imposed and their prospects for future good behaviour. The court found that Mr Fleet had made significant progress towards rehabilitation, maintaining full-time employment, developing a positive relationship, and reducing his drug use. These factors, along with the absence of any further allegations of offending, led the court to conclude that the interests of rehabilitation should take precedence over the need to uphold the court's orders. Therefore, the court decided to cancel the previous good behaviour orders and re-sentence Mr Fleet to an intensive correction order for a period of 12 months, subject to specific additional conditions aimed at supporting his rehabilitation efforts.

In conclusion, the court made orders cancelling the previous good behaviour orders imposed on 20 June 2022 and re-sentencing Mr Fleet to an intensive correction order for each charge for a period of 12 months from 1 August 2023 to 31 July 2024. The order included additional conditions for drug relapse prevention and mental health support, as well as requirements for the offender to contact specific programs and inform the Director-General of ACT Corrective Services if his employment ended.

Orders