R v Baxter - [2017] NSWDC 320

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Baxter [2017] NSWDC 320
Hearing dates: 3 November 2017
Date of orders: 03 November 2017
Decision date: 03 November 2017
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Berman SC DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period 0f 6 years with a head sentence of 9½ years

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Form 1 – Supply indictable quantity of methylamphetamine – Attempting to supply a prohibited firearm – Possess a prohibited firearm – Not keep firearm safely – possess ammunition without holding a licence or permit – Offender on parole at time of offending.
Cases Cited: Jadron v R [2015] NSWCCA 217
R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383
Category: Sentence
Parties: The Crown
Jamie Baxter
Representation: Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions – The Crown
Lambton Law Pty Ltd – The offender

File Number(s): 2016/239913

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR: There are two particular features in the case of Jamie Baxter which point towards leniency being offered to him, but against that is the circumstance that he is being sentenced today for four very serious offences. The two particular factors suggesting leniency concern what led him to become seriously involved in drug use which then led to drug supply, are, first, the untimely death of two members of his family in short succession and secondly the fact that Mr Baxter is doing remarkably well in prison, being well respected and, apart from using a sleeping tablet on one occasion, not using any drugs.
But he must, even despite those features, spend a significant time in custody because of what he did and what his behaviour demonstrated about his attitude towards the law. The events that I am about to describe occurred whilst Mr Baxter was on parole and, more specifically, on parole for a number of offences relating to firearms.
The offender was part of a drug dealing network together with a man by the name of Brendan Hosking. Mr Hosking was supplying drugs to Mr Baxter who was then on-supplying the drugs to other customers. A number of telephone calls and messages were monitored by police in the relatively short period between 29 July 2016 and 9 August which revealed that the offender had received and sent a total of 4,447 SMS messages, a large number of which related to the supply of methylamphetamine and the collection of money owed for the supply of methylamphetamine. It is agreed between the parties that the offender supplied approximately 210 grams of that drug to numerous different customers in that period.
Mr Baxter was deeply involved in the supply of drugs. In that short time he supplied a significant quantity of methylamphetamine and he must have had a significant number of customers. I should emphasise that an authority from the Court of Criminal Appeal Jadron v R [2015] NSWCCA 217 says, that I can, and the parties both ask me to, take into account all of the agreed facts when…

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 Baxter

Details

AGLC: R v Baxter [2017] NSWDC 320
Case: [2017] NSWDC 320
Decision Date: 03 November 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Baxter, was convicted of multiple drug and firearms-related offences. Baxter was on parole at the time of the offending, having been previously convicted of drug-related offences. The case came before the court to determine an appropriate sentence for the multiple and serious offences committed by the appellant. The legal issues before the court involved the appropriate weight to be given to the appellant's parole status, the seriousness of the current offences, and the need for general deterrence.

The court considered the appellant's history of offending, including his parole status and previous drug-related convictions. It was noted that the appellant had a pattern of reoffending and that the current offences were of a serious nature, involving the supply of a significant quantity of methylamphetamine, the attempted supply of a prohibited firearm, possession of a prohibited firearm, and possession of ammunition without a licence. The court emphasised the need for general deterrence in light of the appellant's history and the seriousness of the current offences. The court also considered the appellant's prospects for rehabilitation, but ultimately found that these prospects were not sufficient to warrant a lesser sentence.

The court determined that an aggregate term of imprisonment was appropriate, with a non-parole period of 6 years and a head sentence of 9½ years. The court acknowledged the appellant's parole status and previous convictions but found that these factors did not outweigh the seriousness of the current offences and the need for general deterrence. The court considered the appellant's prospects for rehabilitation but found that these prospects were not sufficient to warrant a lesser sentence. The court concluded that the sentence should reflect the seriousness of the offences, the need for general deterrence, and the appellant's history of reoffending.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period 0f 6 years with a head sentence of 9½ years

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 Baxter [2017] NSWDC 320
Hearing dates:	3 November 2017
Date of orders:	03 November 2017
Decision date:	03 November 2017
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period 0f 6 years with a head sentence of 9½ years
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Form 1 – Supply indictable quantity of methylamphetamine – Attempting to supply a prohibited firearm – Possess a prohibited firearm – Not keep firearm safely – possess ammunition without holding a licence or permit – Offender on parole at time of offending.
Cases Cited:	Jadron v R [2015] NSWCCA 217 R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Jamie Baxter
Representation:	Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions – The Crown Lambton Law Pty Ltd – The offender
File Number(s):	2016/239913