R v Baker - [2022] NSWDC 462

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Baker [2022] NSWDC 462
Hearing dates: 24 May 2022
Date of orders: 24 May 2022
Decision date: 24 May 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence of 6 years with a non-parole period of 3 years, 6 months.

Catchwords:
CRIME – Aggravated enter dwelling with intent - knowing people there - Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO (Domestic) - Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (DV) - Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical harm (domestic)
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – early guilty plea - objectively serious offending offence involved gratuitous cruelty - breach of AVO - victim impact - mentally ill offender- offender needs continuing and detailed mental health supports – offender would best be treated in a mental hospital

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Cases Cited:
DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Engert v R (1995) 84 A Crim R 67
Mapp v R [2010] NSWCCA 269
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
Patterson v R [2021] NSWCCA 273
R v Ponfield [1999] NSWCCA 435
Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247

Category: Sentence
Parties: Stephen Warwick Baker (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr N Ashby, Solicitor Advocate, Legal Aid NSW (for the offender)
Ms A Cabrera (for Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2021/00140213

SENTENCE – EX TEMPORE REVISED

Introduction

When Stephen Warwick Baker was before Local Court he said that he would plead guilty to three matters that were then committed to this court: aggravated enter dwelling with intent to intimidate s 111 (2) Crimes Act 1900, maximum penalty 14 years; assault occasioning actual bodily harm s 59 (1) Crimes Act 1900, maximum penalty of five years; intimidation, s 13 (1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007, maximum penalty five years and/or a substantial fine.
He also asked that I sentence him for a related offence on a section 166 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 certificate of knowingly contravening a prohibition or restriction in an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order s 14 (1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007.
When I sentence him for the aggravated enter with intent offence he asked that I take into account an offence of common assault. It is appropriate and proper that I do so. That assault relates to an event in mid-January 2021. The other offences all occurred on 9 May 2021.
Baker entered early guilty pleas in the Local Court. When I formulate appropriate sentences, I will reduce each indicated sentence by 25 per cent to reflect the utilitarian value of those guilty pleas. I will take care that the process of accumulation of sentences, which is necessary in this matter, not erode the benefit of that plea.
I have the benefit of comprehensive…

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 R v Baker

Details

AGLC: R v Baker [2022] NSWDC 462
Case: [2022] NSWDC 462
Decision Date: 24 May 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of R v Baker involved the defendant, Baker, who was charged with multiple offences including aggravated entering a dwelling with intent, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, stalking, and contravening a domestic violence order. The case was heard in a higher court in Australia, where the defendant’s sentencing was the primary focus. Baker had pleaded guilty to the charges, which involved entering a dwelling while knowing people were present, breaching a domestic violence order, and engaging in behaviour that caused actual bodily harm and instilled fear in the victims.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence, taking into account several legal issues. These included the gravity of the offences, the defendant's early guilty plea, the fact that the offences were committed while knowing people were present in the dwelling, the gratuitous cruelty involved, the breach of a domestic violence order, the impact on the victims, and the defendant's mental health condition. The court also had to consider whether the defendant would benefit from treatment in a mental health facility rather than imprisonment.

In delivering the judgment, the court acknowledged the severity of the offences and the impact on the victims. The defendant's early guilty plea was noted as a mitigating factor. The court found that the offences were particularly egregious due to the gratuitous cruelty involved and the breach of a domestic violence order. Additionally, the court considered the defendant's mental health, determining that ongoing and detailed mental health supports were necessary for the defendant's treatment. Based on these considerations, the court sentenced the defendant to an aggregate term of six years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of three years and six months. The court concluded that the defendant would best be treated in a mental health facility rather than serving the sentence in a conventional prison.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of 6 years with a non-parole period of 3 years, 6 months.

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:	R v Baker [2022] NSWDC 462
Hearing dates:	24 May 2022
Date of orders:	24 May 2022
Decision date:	24 May 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence of 6 years with a non-parole period of 3 years, 6 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME – Aggravated enter dwelling with intent - knowing people there - Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO (Domestic) - Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (DV) - Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical harm (domestic) SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – early guilty plea - objectively serious offending offence involved gratuitous cruelty - breach of AVO - victim impact - mentally ill offender- offender needs continuing and detailed mental health supports – offender would best be treated in a mental hospital
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Engert v R (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 Mapp v R [2010] NSWCCA 269 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Patterson v R [2021] NSWCCA 273 R v Ponfield [1999] NSWCCA 435 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Stephen Warwick Baker (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Solicitors: Mr N Ashby, Solicitor Advocate, Legal Aid NSW (for the offender) Ms A Cabrera (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2021/00140213