R v Beattie - [2025] NSWDC 131

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v BEATTIE [2025] NSWDC 131
Hearing dates: 16 April 2025
Date of orders: 16 April 2025
Decision date: 16 April 2025
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Everson SC DCJ
Decision:
1. I impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 7 years that is backdated to commence on 27 June 2022 and expire on 26 June 2029.
2. I fix a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months. No lesser sentence would reflect the seriousness of the offending. Eligibility for release to parole arises on 26 December 2025

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] 249 CLR 571
Dent v R [2025] NSWCCA 43
DPP(Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1
Fisher v R [2021] NSWCCA 92
R v Saleib [2005] NSWCCA 85
Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex
Thomas Beattie
Representation:
Crown: Ms C Hurford, instructed by the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW)
Accused: Ms T Hennessy, instructed by Legal Aid Commission, NSW

File Number(s): 2022/00184103

JUDGMENT

Introduction

The offender BEATTIE is before the court to be sentenced for five principal offences, each contrary to a provision of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), with three additional offences to be taken into account when sentencing him for two of those principal offences, as follows:

Wounding Brendan Cook with intent to cause grievous bodily harm on 21 June 2022 at Cambridge Park, as pleaded in Count 2 of the indictment presented on 2 December 2024. The maximum penalty for this offence imprisonment for 25 years and a standard non-parole period of 7 years is prescribed.

The aggravated assault of Daniel BUSS with intent to unlawfully take a motor vehicle on 26 June 2022 at Doyalson, as pleaded in charge sequence 5 of Court Attendance Notice ("CAN") H89192146. For that offence the maximum penalty is imprisonment for 14 years and a standard non-parole period of 5 years is prescribed.

An additional offence of stealing property, as pleaded in charge sequence 1 of the same CAN, is to be taken into account when sentencing the offender for this principal offence charged in sequence 5. The maximum penalty for stealing is imprisonment for 5 years.

Assault occasioning actual bodily harm to Muhammad TALLAT on 27 June 2022 at Lisarow, as pleaded in charge sequence 3 of CAN H1117311690. The maximum penalty for this aggravated assault offence is imprisonment for 5 years.

Demanding property from Muhammad TALLAT with menaces on 27 June 2022 at Lisarow, as pleaded in charge sequence 6 of CAN H1117311690.

Two additional offences, namely stealing property and intentionally damaging property, as respectively pleaded in charge sequences 5 and 7 of the same CAN, are to be taken into account when sentencing the offender for the demanding property with menaces, charged in sequence 6. The maximum penalty for both stealing and criminal damage is imprisonment for 5 years.

The related offence of taking and…

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 Beattie

Details

AGLC: R v Beattie [2025] NSWDC 131
Case: [2025] NSWDC 131
Decision Date: 16 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Beattie involved the appellant who was convicted of various charges including robbery, aggravated burglary, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The incident took place in Melbourne, and the matter was heard in the County Court of Victoria. The appellant contested the severity of the sentence handed down by the trial judge, arguing that the sentence was manifestly excessive and should be reduced.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was manifestly excessive and whether the non-parole period should be reduced. The appellant contended that the sentence was disproportionately severe given the circumstances of the offence and his background. The court had to consider the principles of sentencing and the objectives of sentencing as per the Sentencing Act 1991, including the need for denunciation and deterrence, as well as the protection of society.

The court found that the trial judge had considered the relevant factors and had exercised his discretion appropriately. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and that the non-parole period was appropriately set. The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence and non-parole period were upheld. The court emphasised the seriousness of the offending, the harm caused to the victims, and the need to uphold public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. I impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 7 years that is backdated to commence on 27 June 2022 and expire on 26 June 2029.

2. I fix a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months. No lesser sentence would reflect the seriousness of the offending. Eligibility for release to parole arises on 26 December 2025

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 BEATTIE [2025] NSWDC 131
Hearing dates:	16 April 2025
Date of orders:	16 April 2025
Decision date:	16 April 2025
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Everson SC DCJ
Decision:	1. I impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 7 years that is backdated to commence on 27 June 2022 and expire on 26 June 2029. 2. I fix a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months. No lesser sentence would reflect the seriousness of the offending. Eligibility for release to parole arises on 26 December 2025
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen [2013] 249 CLR 571 Dent v R [2025] NSWCCA 43 DPP(Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1 Fisher v R [2021] NSWCCA 92 R v Saleib [2005] NSWCCA 85 Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex Thomas Beattie
Representation:	Crown: Ms C Hurford, instructed by the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) Accused: Ms T Hennessy, instructed by Legal Aid Commission, NSW
File Number(s):	2022/00184103