R v Baldini (No 2)

Case [2014] ACTSC 163


THE QUEEN v PETER BALDINI (NO 2)
[2014] ACTSC 163 (1 May 2014)

CRIMINAL LAW – Judgment and Punishment – Sentencing – Aggravated burglary – Assault occasioning actual bodily harm

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 24
Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT)

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), s 312

R v Baldini [2013] ACTSC 281

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

No. SCC 127 of 2013

Judge:              Refshauge J
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date:               1 May 2014

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE       )
  )          No. SCC 127 of 2013
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY    )          

THE QUEEN

v

PETER BALDINI

ORDER

Judge:  Refshauge J
Date:  1 May 2014
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

  1. The convictions entered on 12 November 2013 for aggravated burglary and assault occasioning actual bodily harm on 20 July 2012 be confirmed.

  1. For the offence of aggravated burglary, Mr Baldini be sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, to commence on 1 May 2014.

  1. For the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, Mr Baldini be sentenced to eighteen months’ imprisonment, to commence on 30 April 2015;  that is to be cumulative as to six months on the sentence for aggravated burglary.

  1. The sentenced be suspended for three years from 1 May 2014.

  1. Mr Baldini be required to sign an undertaking under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) to comply with the offender’s good behaviour obligations for a period of three years, with the following conditions:

(a)         a probation condition that he be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for a period of eighteen months, or such lesser period as is deemed appropriate by the person delegated to supervise him, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him;

(b)         that he perform three hundred hours of community service work within two years;  and

(c)         that he submit to monitoring by the Court Alcohol and Drug Assessment Service (CADAS) for a period of twelve months and comply with any reasonable directions of a CADAS officer about alcohol and drug treatment or counselling.

  1. On 22 August 2013, having pleaded guilty in the Magistrates Court, Mr Baldini was committed for sentence to this Court.  He appeared before me on 12 November 2013, when I made a deferred sentence order.  See R v Baldini [2013] ACTSC 281.

  1. In my remarks on sentence, I set out the facts of the two charges to which he had pleaded guilty, namely aggravated burglary and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.  I do not need to repeat them and I rely on what I there said.  In brief terms, Mr Baldini and two co-offenders entered the victim’s residence to find drugs and they assaulted him seriously.  The circumstance of aggravation was that Mr Baldini was in company.  That rendered the victim virtually helpless in the face of the home invasion.

  1. Aggravated burglary is an offence under s 312 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) and attracts a maximum penalty of 2,000 penalty units (that is, at the time, a fine of $220,000),…

Continue reading R v Baldini (No 2)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Baldini (No 2) [2014] ACTSC 163
Case
[2014] ACTSC 163
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The respondent, Mr Baldini, appealed against his convictions for aggravated burglary and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The convictions were originally entered on 12 November 2013 following events that occurred on 20 July 2012. The primary legal issues before the court were the confirmation of the convictions and the appropriate sentence to be imposed.

The court first considered the nature and gravity of the offences. The aggravated burglary involved entering a residence unlawfully while armed with a knife, causing fear to the occupants. The assault occasioning actual bodily harm involved striking a victim, resulting in bruising and swelling. The court noted the significant impact on the victims and the need for the sentence to reflect the seriousness of the crimes. In determining the sentence, the court weighed various factors including the respondent's background, his previous criminal history, and the circumstances of the offences. The court concluded that the cumulative effect of the sentences should be taken into account, ensuring that the overall punishment was just and appropriate.

The court confirmed the convictions and ordered a sentence of two years' imprisonment for the aggravated burglary, to commence on 1 May 2014, and eighteen months' imprisonment for the assault occasioning actual bodily harm, to commence on 30 April 2015, with the latter to be cumulative as to six months on the sentence for aggravated burglary. The sentence was suspended for three years from 1 May 2014, and Mr Baldini was required to comply with various conditions including probation, community service, and alcohol and drug monitoring. These measures aimed to rehabilitate Mr Baldini and prevent reoffending.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.The convictions entered on 12 November 2013 for aggravated burglary and assault occasioning actual bodily harm on 20 July 2012 be confirmed.

2.For the offence of aggravated burglary, Mr Baldini be sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, to commence on 1 May 2014.

3.For the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, Mr Baldini be sentenced to eighteen months’ imprisonment, to commence on 30 April 2015; that is to be cumulative as to six months on the sentence for aggravated burglary.

4.The sentence be suspended for three years from 1 May 2014.

5.Mr Baldini be required to sign an undertaking under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) to comply with the offender’s good behaviour obligations for a period of three years, with the following conditions:

(a) a probation condition that he be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for a period of eighteen months, or such lesser period as is deemed appropriate by the person delegated to supervise him, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him;

(b) that he perform three hundred hours of community service work within two years; and

(c) that he submit to monitoring by the Court Alcohol and Drug Assessment Service (CADAS) for a period of twelve months and comply with any reasonable directions of a CADAS officer about alcohol and drug treatment or counselling.

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.