Perrin (No.2) v The The King - [2022] NSWDC 702

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Perrin (No.2) v R [2022] NSWDC 702
Hearing dates: 6 August 2021, 28 September 2022
Date of orders: 28 September 2022
Decision date: 28 September 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Resentence following direction by Court of Criminal Appeal
The sentence appeal is upheld in part. I confirm the conviction but vary the sentence imposed by the Local Court. For sentence see [14].

Catchwords:
APPEAL - Appeal against sentence- Review after Stated Case remitted following order by Court of Criminal Appeal
CRIME – Domestic violence offences - multiple offences - Reckless wounding - assault occasioning actual bodily harm – common assault
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE− proper application of s 58 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – Taking guilty pleas into account where notional Local Court sentence exceeds 5 years – applying Park v The Queen
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - s 58 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
SENTENCING — Appeal against sentence — Powers of court — Appeal to the District Court
SENTENCING – resentence-no change to previously indicted sentence multiple and serious domestic violence offences - notional sentence exceeds 5 years after taking into account guilty pleas - fresh evidence – appellant maturing and engaged in rehabilitation programmes- should previous non-parole period be varied

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2000
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56
Parkv The Queen [2021] HCA 37
Perrin v R [2021] NSWDC 408
R v Perrin [2022] NSWCCA 170

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Cody Perrin (the appellant)
Director of Public Prosecutions (the respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the appellant)
Mr D Coulton, Crown Prosecutor (for the respondent)
Solicitors:
Morrisons Law (for the appellant)

File Number(s): 2020/00054156
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Wollongong Local Court

Jurisdiction:

Local Court Crime

Date of Decision:

21 June 2021

Before:

McGowan LCM

File Number(s):

2020/00054156

Judgment

Introduction

This matter was returned to the District Court after a Crown Stated case was upheld by the Court of Criminal Appeal: R v Perrin [2022] NSWCCA 170.
The sentence I imposed, Haesler SC DCJ, on 17 August 2021 was quashed. And the matter was remitted to the District Court for the appeal relating to the sentence imposed on 24 June 2021 by McGowan LCM to be determined according to law.

Redetermination of the appeal

In my earlier judgment, I set out the Perrin’s background: Perrin v R [2021] NSWDC 408. I also made findings about the seriousness of the crimes he committed. Those crimes were extensive. They were directed at his partners and showed a complete disregard for the women he was in a relationship with. Those findings were not challenged on appeal. As the prosecutor submitted, then and now, they required a sentence of some severity, to vindicate the dignity of the victims of domestic violence…

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 Perrin (No.2) v The The King

Details

AGLC: Perrin (No.2) v The The King [2022] NSWDC 702
Case: [2022] NSWDC 702
Decision Date: 28 September 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Perrin, appealed against the sentence imposed by the Local Court, which had convicted him of multiple domestic violence offences, including reckless wounding, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and common assault. The Court of Criminal Appeal reviewed the case following a remitted Stated Case and assessed whether the District Court had properly applied Section 58 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) when considering the appellant's guilty pleas and the resulting notional sentence. The court was also tasked with determining whether the non-parole period should be varied, given the appellant's engagement in rehabilitation programs and his maturation since the initial sentencing.

The District Court considered the appellant's multiple and serious domestic violence offences, as well as his guilty pleas. The notional sentence for these offences exceeded five years, as per Section 58 of the Act. The court was required to interpret and apply the relevant legislation in determining the appropriate sentence. The court also had to weigh the fresh evidence presented, including the appellant's rehabilitation efforts and maturation since the original sentencing. The court had to balance these factors with the need to adequately punish the appellant for his serious criminal conduct.

The District Court confirmed the conviction but varied the sentence imposed by the Local Court. The court found that the notional sentence for the offences exceeded five years, taking into account the appellant's guilty pleas. The court also considered the fresh evidence presented, including the appellant's engagement in rehabilitation programs and his maturation since the original sentencing. The court ultimately decided that the previous non-parole period should not be varied, as the appellant's efforts did not warrant a significant reduction in his sentence. The sentence appeal was upheld in part, and the District Court varied the sentence imposed by the Local Court.

The District Court confirmed the conviction but varied the sentence imposed by the Local Court. The appellant was sentenced to a total effective prison term of 4 years and 3 months, with a non-parole period of 3 years. The court considered the appellant's guilty pleas, the seriousness of his offences, and his engagement in rehabilitation programs. The court found that the appellant's efforts did not warrant a significant reduction in his sentence, and therefore, the previous non-parole period remained unchanged.

Orders

Orders of the court

Resentence following direction by Court of Criminal Appeal

The sentence appeal is upheld in part. I confirm the conviction but vary the sentence imposed by the Local Court. For sentence see [14].

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:	Perrin (No.2) v R [2022] NSWDC 702
Hearing dates:	6 August 2021, 28 September 2022
Date of orders:	28 September 2022
Decision date:	28 September 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Resentence following direction by Court of Criminal Appeal The sentence appeal is upheld in part. I confirm the conviction but vary the sentence imposed by the Local Court. For sentence see [14].
Catchwords:	APPEAL - Appeal against sentence- Review after Stated Case remitted following order by Court of Criminal Appeal CRIME – Domestic violence offences - multiple offences - Reckless wounding - assault occasioning actual bodily harm – common assault CRIMINAL PROCEDURE− proper application of s 58 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – Taking guilty pleas into account where notional Local Court sentence exceeds 5 years – applying Park v The Queen STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - s 58 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) SENTENCING — Appeal against sentence — Powers of court — Appeal to the District Court SENTENCING – resentence-no change to previously indicted sentence multiple and serious domestic violence offences - notional sentence exceeds 5 years after taking into account guilty pleas - fresh evidence – appellant maturing and engaged in rehabilitation programmes- should previous non-parole period be varied
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2000 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56 Parkv The Queen [2021] HCA 37 Perrin v R [2021] NSWDC 408 R v Perrin [2022] NSWCCA 170
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Cody Perrin (the appellant) Director of Public Prosecutions (the respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the appellant) Mr D Coulton, Crown Prosecutor (for the respondent) Solicitors: Morrisons Law (for the appellant)
File Number(s):	2020/00054156
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Wollongong Local Court Jurisdiction: Local Court Crime Date of Decision: 21 June 2021 Before: McGowan LCM File Number(s): 2020/00054156