Glover v The King; Coco v The King - [2023] NSWDC 322

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Glover v R; Coco v R [2023] NSWDC 322
Hearing dates: 15 March 2023
Date of orders: 15 March 2023
Decision date: 15 March 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:
Glover:
The severity appeal is upheld. The conviction and sentence orders are set aside. The appellant is to comply with a conditional release order without conviction for a period of 12 months: at [19].
Coco:
Sequences 1, 4, 7
The severity appeal is upheld. The convictions are confirmed, and the sentence orders are set aside.
Sequence 1, the appellant is to comply with a conditional release order with conviction for a period of 12 months
Sequence 4 & 7, the appellant is convicted pursuant to s10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
Sequence 3
Leave granted to file a conviction appeal. The appeal is unopposed. The conviction appeal is upheld and the conviction and sentence orders are set aside.
: at [31]-[32].

Catchwords:
CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against conviction
CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Re-sentence – “false fact”
SENTENCING — Appeal against sentence — Severity
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Factual basis for sentence — Quasi custody — Objective seriousness — Proportionality
SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Findings of fact
SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Explosive Regulation 2013
Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002
Roads Act 1993

Cases Cited:
KM v R [2023] NSWCCA 10
R v Mauger [2012] NSWCCA 51

Category: Sentence
Parties:
Alan Glover (Appellant)

Deanna Coco (Appellant)
Rex (Respondent, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
Representation:
Ms I Maxwell-Williams (Solicitor for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)

Ms F Graham (Counsel for the Appellant - Mr Glover)
Mr M Blair (Solicitro forthe Appellant - Ms Coco)

File Number(s): 2022/00106913; 2022/00106974
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Local Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

Glover: 7 March 2023
Coco: 2 December 2022

Before:

Glover: Magistrate Reiss
Coco: Magistrate Hawkins

File Number(s):

2022/00106913
2022/00106974

Judgment

On the morning of Wednesday 30 April 2022, 31-year-old Deanna Coco and 61-year-old Alan Glover engaged in a protest on the Sydney Harbour Bridge which, in short, was motivated by their sincerely held beliefs about the effects of climate change on the planet. The Court of course expresses no view about that debate which occupies a great deal of media time and attention for those passionately involved in the cause.
The appellants were dealt with in the Local Court at different times. Mr Glover was sentenced last week after pleading guilty to an offence contrary to s 144G of the Roads Act 1993 of entering the Sydney Harbour Bridge to disrupt vehicles. Magistrate Reiss imposed a Community Corrections Order for 18 months and a fine of $3,000, taking into account on a Form 1 a charge of using an explosive not in a prescribed manner.
Ms…

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 Glover v The King; Coco v The King

Details

AGLC: Glover v The King; Coco v The King [2023] NSWDC 322
Case: [2023] NSWDC 322
Decision Date: 15 March 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the cases of Glover v The King and Coco v The King, the appellants sought appeals against their respective convictions and sentences. The appellants in both cases were found guilty of various charges relating to their involvement in criminal activities. The appeals were heard and determined by the High Court of Australia. The primary issues before the court were the severity of the sentences imposed and the proportionality of the penalties relative to the crimes committed.
The court was tasked with determining whether the sentences handed down were excessive and whether they appropriately reflected the nature and circumstances of the offences. In assessing the severity of the sentences, the court considered various factors, including the role of each appellant in the crimes, the objective seriousness of the offences, and the appropriateness of the sentences given the circumstances. The court also examined the principle of proportionality and whether the sentences imposed were disproportionate to the crimes.
In Glover's case, the court found that the severity of the sentence was indeed disproportionate to the crime committed. The court concluded that the original sentence was excessively harsh and did not adequately reflect the objective seriousness of the offence. Consequently, the court set aside the conviction and sentence orders and imposed a conditional release order without conviction for a period of 12 months. In Coco's case, the court also found the severity of the sentences to be disproportionate. The court set aside the sentence orders while confirming the convictions. Different sequences of the appeal led to varied outcomes, with some requiring conditional release orders with conviction, while others involved convictions under specific sections of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
The court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that sentences are proportionate to the crimes committed, taking into account the specific circumstances and the roles of the offenders. The final orders included setting aside the original convictions and sentences for Glover and Coco, with conditional release orders replacing the original penalties. The decisions underscore the need for judicial review in sentencing to maintain fairness and proportionality in the criminal justice system.

Orders

Orders of the court

Glover:

The severity appeal is upheld. The conviction and sentence orders are set aside. The appellant is to comply with a conditional release order without conviction for a period of 12 months: at [19].

Coco:

Sequences 1, 4, 7

The severity appeal is upheld. The convictions are confirmed, and the sentence orders are set aside.

Sequence 1, the appellant is to comply with a conditional release order with conviction for a period of 12 months

Sequence 4 & 7, the appellant is convicted pursuant to s10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

Sequence 3

Leave granted to file a conviction appeal. The appeal is unopposed. The conviction appeal is upheld and the conviction and sentence orders are set aside.

: at [31]-[32].

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Glover v R; Coco v R [2023] NSWDC 322
Hearing dates:	15 March 2023
Date of orders:	15 March 2023
Decision date:	15 March 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:	Glover: The severity appeal is upheld. The conviction and sentence orders are set aside. The appellant is to comply with a conditional release order without conviction for a period of 12 months: at [19]. Coco: Sequences 1, 4, 7 The severity appeal is upheld. The convictions are confirmed, and the sentence orders are set aside. Sequence 1, the appellant is to comply with a conditional release order with conviction for a period of 12 months Sequence 4 & 7, the appellant is convicted pursuant to s10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. Sequence 3 Leave granted to file a conviction appeal. The appeal is unopposed. The conviction appeal is upheld and the conviction and sentence orders are set aside. : at [31]-[32].
Catchwords:	CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against conviction CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Re-sentence – “false fact” SENTENCING — Appeal against sentence — Severity SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Factual basis for sentence — Quasi custody — Objective seriousness — Proportionality SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Findings of fact SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Explosive Regulation 2013 Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 Roads Act 1993
Cases Cited:	KM v R [2023] NSWCCA 10 R v Mauger [2012] NSWCCA 51
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Alan Glover (Appellant) Deanna Coco (Appellant) Rex (Respondent, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
Representation:	Ms I Maxwell-Williams (Solicitor for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions) Ms F Graham (Counsel for the Appellant - Mr Glover) Mr M Blair (Solicitro forthe Appellant - Ms Coco)
File Number(s):	2022/00106913; 2022/00106974
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Local Court Jurisdiction: Criminal Date of Decision: Glover: 7 March 2023 Coco: 2 December 2022 Before: Glover: Magistrate Reiss Coco: Magistrate Hawkins File Number(s): 2022/00106913 2022/00106974