Pierpoint v The Queen

[2020] NSWDC 124

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Pierpoint v R [2020] NSWDC 124
Hearing dates:	24-25 February 2020, 6 March 2020
Date of orders:	06 March 2020
Decision date:	06 March 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Neilson DCJ
Decision:	See [5]
Catchwords:	CRIME. SENTENCE. SEVERITY APPEAL. Minor adjustment of sentences to allow appellant to keep his Housing Commission accommodation, to promote rehabilitation.
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Appellant – David Allan Pierpoint Respondent – Regina
Representation:	Appellant – In person Respondent - L. Hawke (ODPP)
File Number(s):	2019/00267615
Publication restriction:	Nil.
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Local Court of NSW Jurisdiction: Criminal Date of Decision: 7 November 2019 Before: Bartley LCM File Number(s): 2019/00267615

Sentence

1. HIS HONOUR: On 7 November 2019 the appellant appeared before Bartley LCM sitting at Newtown. The appellant stood for sentence in respect of six charges. He pleaded guilty to four of them. His Honour imposed different penalties for each offence but the longest sentence was of imprisonment for 16 months commencing on 6 November 2019, expiring on 5 March 2021. His Honour fixed a non-parole period of seven months which made the appellant eligible for release on 5 June 2020. All the other sentences that his Honour imposed permitted the appellant to be eligible for release on parole on 5 June 2010.

2. The appellant appeals against the severity of the sentence. The relief he seeks is not particularly great and the reason for it is completely understandable. Furthermore, he supports his application by pointing out that on previous occasions when released on parole his behaviour has been exemplary. Perhaps ‘exemplary’ might be overstating the mark but at least, as the appellant himself said, he has been good. That is reflected in fact in the sentences imposed by his Honour who although he fixed a head sentence of 16 months imprisonment which ought to have indicated a non-parole period of 12 months, in fact his Honour imposed a non-parole period of seven months, finding special circumstances. Special circumstances obviously are the facts that on previous occasions the appellant has done well whilst under the direction and control of Corrective Services.

3. The appellant asks merely that he become eligible for parole just a little over one month earlier in order that he not lose his Housing Commission tenancy for which he has waited for many, many, years. The loss of that tenancy would severely impede his rehabilitation in that he would effectively be rendered homeless again and may be tempted to commit crime in order to survive in trying to live on the streets. I have no hesitation in the circumstances in acceding to the appellant’s application.

4. I intend to reduce the non-parole period by one month and one week which ought enable the appellant to keep his Housing Commission premises because at the time of his release the lease that he had obtained from the Housing Commission will not have expired. I need to adjust a number of other sentences accordingly.

5. For those reasons I make the following orders:

I allow the appeal in part.

H71996747

Sequence 1 - resentenced to imprisonment for 16 months commencing on 6 November 2019, expiring on 5 March 2021. I fix a non-parole period of 175 days which expires on 28 April 2020.

Sequence 2 - appeal dismissed.

H72341050

Sequence 1 - resentenced to imprisonment for four months commencing on 29 December 2019, expiring on 28 April 2020.

Sequence 2 - resentenced to imprisonment for four months commencing on 29 December 2019, expiring on 28 April 2020.

H73258232

Resentenced to imprisonment for four days commencing on 25 April 2020, expiring on 28 April 2020.

H7235642

Sequence 1 - resentenced to imprisonment for 175 days commencing on 6 November 2019, expiring on 28 April 2020.

6. I think that solves the problem that’s identified, does it not?

HAWKE: Yes, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Ms Hawke, thank you.

You will be eligible for parole, Mr Pierpoint, on 28 April 2020.

APPELLANT: Thank you, your Worship.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you.

APPELLANT: I appreciate that.

HIS HONOUR: That’s all right. And it’s ‘your Honour’.

APPELLANT: Sorry, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: And even now in the Local Court you have to ‘Honoured’ not ‘Worship’. All right.

APPELLANT: Thank you, sir. Thank you.

**********

Decision last updated: 21 April 2020