R v Carr - [2025] NSWDC 291

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Carr [2025] NSWDC 291
Hearing dates: 3/7/25
Date of orders: 3/7/25
Decision date: 03 July 2025
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bourke SC DCJ
Decision:
Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 6 years with a NPP of 4 years 2 months (8/8/23-7/10/27). I find special circumstances.
Indicative sentences (after 25 percent discount):
Seq 3 – 2 years 10 months (Form 1 taken into account).
Seq 5 – 4 years 6 months
Seq 7 – 3 years
Seq 2 – 12 months

Catchwords:
Crime – Sentence – Choking – Recklessness as to rendering unconscious – Intimidation – Contravene ADVO

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

Cases Cited:
Attorney-General’s Application No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518
Bugmy v R [2013] HCA 37
DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Jonson v R [2016] NSWCCA 286
R v Stevens [2024] NSWCCA

Category: Sentence
Parties: NSW DPP – Crown
Jason Carr - Offender
Representation: Ms R Atkinson for Crown
Ms K Cooper for Offender

File Number(s): 2023/183315
Publication restriction: Non-publication order re the identity of the victim

remarks on sentence

The offender Mr Jason Carr is before the Court for sentence on a number of matters. Firstly sequence 3, an offence of intentionally choking a person without consent under s 37(1K) of the Crimes Act 1900. That offence carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment. Also in sentencing him for that offence he asks that I take into account on a Form 1 document an offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
The second substantive offence for sentence is the sequence 5 offence which is one of intentionally choking a person so as to render that person unconscious and being reckless as to rendering her unconscious. That is an offence under s 37(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 and carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.
The third substantive offence is the sequence 7 offence which is one of intimidation under s 13(1) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 and carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment.
The fourth offence which is to be dealt with on a s 166 certificate, is one of contravening an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order, that being sequence 2. That is subject to the Local Court jurisdictional limit and, in any event, carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment.
The maximum penalties are of course important guideposts in the sentencing exercise to which I have had regard.
The offender pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and will be given a 25% discount as required by law by reason of the utilitarian value of those pleas of guilty.

FACTS

The victim of the offences before the Court is a young woman who I will refer to as JB. She and the offender had previously been in a relationship. They had one child together…

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 Carr

Details

AGLC: R v Carr [2025] NSWDC 291
Case: [2025] NSWDC 291
Decision Date: 03 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Carr, stood trial in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, facing charges stemming from an incident involving the choking of a victim. The dispute centred on the severity of the assault, the appellant's level of recklessness in rendering the victim unconscious, and whether the act constituted intimidation. The case also involved allegations of contravening an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO). The court had to determine the appropriate sentence for the appellant, considering the totality of his criminal conduct and the special circumstances presented.

The court identified several key legal issues, including the correct interpretation of recklessness in relation to rendering the victim unconscious, the relevance of the ADVO, and the appropriate weight to give to the appellant's criminal history. The court also needed to decide on the application of special circumstances in the sentencing process and the appropriate discount for the appellant's early guilty plea. The court examined the appellant's previous convictions, the nature of the current offences, and the need for deterrence and denunciation.

In reaching its decision, the court meticulously analysed the evidence and submissions presented. It found that the appellant's actions demonstrated a significant level of recklessness, leading to the victim being rendered unconscious. The court found the ADVO violation to be a relevant factor, as it highlighted the appellant's ongoing disregard for legal and protective orders. The court considered the appellant's extensive criminal history, which included previous violence and breaches of orders, as a critical special circumstance. After applying the discount for the early guilty plea, the court determined the aggregate sentence to be six years of imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years and two months, effective from 8 August 2023 until 7 October 2027.

The court's final orders were for the appellant to be sentenced to imprisonment for a total of six years, with a non-parole period of four years and two months. The court also noted that special circumstances were present and applied an indicative sentencing approach, discounting the sentences by 25 percent. The specific sentences for each sequence were two years and ten months for Sequence 3, four years and six months for Sequence 5, three years for Sequence 7, and twelve months for Sequence 2. These sentences reflected the court's consideration of the severity of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, and the need for appropriate deterrence and denunciation.

Orders

Orders of the court

Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 6 years with a NPP of 4 years 2 months (8/8/23-7/10/27). I find special circumstances.

Indicative sentences (after 25 percent discount):

Seq 3 – 2 years 10 months (Form 1 taken into account).

Seq 5 – 4 years 6 months

Seq 7 – 3 years

Seq 2 – 12 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 Carr [2025] NSWDC 291
Hearing dates:	3/7/25
Date of orders:	3/7/25
Decision date:	03 July 2025
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bourke SC DCJ
Decision:	Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 6 years with a NPP of 4 years 2 months (8/8/23-7/10/27). I find special circumstances. Indicative sentences (after 25 percent discount): Seq 3 – 2 years 10 months (Form 1 taken into account). Seq 5 – 4 years 6 months Seq 7 – 3 years Seq 2 – 12 months
Catchwords:	Crime – Sentence – Choking – Recklessness as to rendering unconscious – Intimidation – Contravene ADVO
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	Attorney-General’s Application No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518 Bugmy v R [2013] HCA 37 DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Jonson v R [2016] NSWCCA 286 R v Stevens [2024] NSWCCA
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	NSW DPP – Crown Jason Carr - Offender
Representation:	Ms R Atkinson for Crown Ms K Cooper for Offender
File Number(s):	2023/183315
Publication restriction:	Non-publication order re the identity of the victim