R v B
[2016] ACTSC 135
•3 June 2016
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v B |
Citation: | [2016] ACTSC 135 |
Hearing Date: | 3 June 2016 |
DecisionDate: | 3 June 2016 |
Before: | Murrell CJ |
Decision: | Good behaviour order cancelled. Resentenced to imprisonment from 3 March 2016 to 16 March 2017, suspended on 16 July 2016 upon the offender entering into a good behaviour order with conditions. |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – resentence – breach of good behaviour order – attempted aggravated robbery |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) B (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel Mr A Williamson (Crown) Mr P Edmonds (Offender) |
| Solicitors ACT DPP (Crown) Canberra Criminal Lawyers (Offender) | |
File Number: | SCC 192 of 2013; SCC 8 of 2014 |
MURRELL CJ:
This matter has a very long history.
The young person committed many offences between 2011 and 2013. His offending behaviour must be seen against a deprived background, including a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, a deprived home background, lack of parental role models and a history of disruptive behaviour, which commenced with the sudden death of his father when the young person was four or five years old. However, in my dealings with the young person he is a polite and engaging young man who seems to be not without prospects.
The offences that are before the Court today were committed in 2013. Originally, I imposed sentences for a suite of offences. The sentences were for a total period of two years, of which about half was to be served by way of full-time imprisonment. Most of the sentences were served out, but the sentence for an offence of attempted aggravated robbery was not fully served. For this offence, I had imposed a sentence of 18 months from 20 July 2014. About six months of that sentence had been served and 12 months and two weeks was suspended when the young person was released on a good behaviour order on 7 January 2015.
For a short period after his release, the young person performed well, but a breach report was submitted in May 2015 concerning non-compliance with supervision, failing to attend school and other matters.
In September and October 2015, the offender committed two sets of offences, both of which related to conflict with his mother. They involved common assault and damage to property. In relation to these matters, the Childrens Court issued a warrant.
On 21 January 2016, the young person was arrested. Thereafter, he remained in custody for approximately two months until 15 March 2016.
He came before this Court on 11 February 2016, in relation to the breach of a good behaviour order. I granted him bail, but he was not released to bail until 15 March 2016 when the Childrens Court also granted him bail.
In the period between mid-March and early May 2016, while he was in the community the young person underwent two drug tests. The first, on 24 March 2016, showed a high cannabis reading and the second, on 8 April 2016, showed a positive cannabis reading, but the reading was somewhat lower.
The position seemed to be moderately promising in April 2016. The young person began regularly attending a fitness gym and he was due to commence a bricklaying apprenticeship.
Unfortunately, in early May, the situation deteriorated and the young person was charged with committing offences of resisting and assaulting police and damaging property. The offences were associated with police intervention following a disagreement between the young person and his mother.
The young person was returned to custody on 7 May 2016, approximately a month ago.
I am aware that the offences that occurred in September and October of 2015 are listed for sentence before the Childrens Court next week. I intend to take into account all the time that the young person has spent in custody since his release on 7 January 2015, being a period that I will round up to three months.
Today, the Court heard evidence from Mr Sweeney, the court officer for the Child and Youth Protection Services. Mr Sweeney observed that, in the period March to May 2016 when the young person was in the community, there were no concerns about the young person's behaviour. He attended all appointments and the drug test results, while positive, were not particularly alarming.
Last month, when the young person was back at Bimberi, he participated by undertaking education which, the young person's legal representative informs me, involved commencing Year 11.
Youth Services have confirmed that, upon release, the young person will have access to the apprenticeship previously offered, and further, a more promising domestic arrangement is now available, that being at the home of his girlfriend's aunt, where he would reside with his girlfriend, her aunt and the aunt's partner. This accommodation has been assessed as suitable.
The young person has had his ups and downs and, in the period that I have known him, he has shown promise and then disappointed, but the overall impression that I have is that he is gaining maturity. If he is released to more stable accommodation, kept away from situations that tend to descend into conflict and given a high level of support, I hope that he can integrate into the community in an appropriate way. In my view, he should serve a limited further period in custody before being released to serve a significant period in the community.
I cancel the good behaviour order relating to the offence of attempted aggravated robbery. I resentence the offender to imprisonment from 3 March 2016 to 16 March 2017. In resentencing the offender, I note that I am aware of the special requirements that apply when sentencing young persons.
I make a suspended sentence order suspending the sentence from 16 July 2016 and I make a good behaviour order requiring the young person to sign an undertaking to comply with his good behaviour obligations during the remainder of the period to 16 March 2017. The good behaviour order is subject to the condition that the young person submit to the supervision of the Director General of the ACT Community Services Directorate for as long as the Director General considers necessary, but not beyond 16 March 2017.
| I certify that the preceding eighteen [18] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of her Honour Chief Justice Murrell. Associate: Date: 23 June 2016 |
0
0
0