R v Brett Anthony Debrueys
[2011] ACTSC 178
•27 October 2011
R v BRETT ANTHONY DEBRUEYS
[2011] ACTSC 178 (27 October 2011)
JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – amendment – accidental slip or omission – criminal proceedings – power to amend – r 6906, Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT).
Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), s 61
Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 6906
R v Gorman [2009] ACTSC 7
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
No. SCC 141 of 2010
No. SCC 299 of 2011
Judge: Refshauge ACJ
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 27 October 2011
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. SCC 141 of 2010
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY ) No. SCC 299 of 2011
R
V
BRETT ANTHONY DEBRUEYS
ORDER
Judge: Refshauge ACJ
Date: 27 October 2011
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The sentence imposed by the Honourable Justice Refshauge on 5 October 2011 be varied by omitting from the sentence for the charge of damaging property the word and figures “13 July 2017” and substituting “13 April 2017”.
On 5 October 2011, I sentenced Brett Anthony Debrueys to what I expressed to be a total sentence of seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years from 13 January 2011, for offences of aggravated robbery, burglary, theft and damage property.
In expressing the concurrency and partial concurrency of the sentences, I said in respect of the sentence for the offence of damaging property:
I sentence you to nine months imprisonment to commence on 13 July 2017, that is to be cumulative as to six months on the sentence for burglary.
This, however, was internally inconsistent, for the sentence for burglary ended on 12 July 2012. To make the sentence cumulative as to six months would require it to commence on 13 April 2017.
Similarly, I summarised the sentences by indicating that the respective sentences totalled seven years. As articulated, by reference to the dates, that was inconsistent, for the sentence amounted to seven years and three months.
I am satisfied that I made a slip or error and that it was an accident. It is unfortunate, but happens from time to time when imposing multiple sentences. It is to be regretted, especially as it may create tension or distress in the sentenced offender.
I explained in R v Gorman [2009] ACTSC 7 that such an error, although almost certainly not amendable to correction under s 61 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), is able to be remedied under r 6906 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) and I will do so.
Accordingly, I will vary the sentence imposed by omitting from the sentence for the charge of damaging property the word and figures “13 July 2017” and substitute “13 April 2017”. The balance of the sentences remain unaffected.
I certify that the preceding seven (7) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Justice Refshauge.
Associate:
Date: 31 October 2011
Counsel for the Crown: Mr J Lawton
Solicitor for the Crown: ACT Director of Public Prosecutions
Counsel for the Offender: Mr R Livingston
Solicitor for the Offender: Craig Lynch and Associates
Date of hearing: 27 October 2011
Date of judgment: 27 October 2011
2