R v Challis - [2022] NSWDC 617

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Challis [2022] NSWDC 617
Hearing dates: 6 March 2020
Date of orders: 9 December 2022
Decision date: 09 December 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Mahony SC DCJ
Decision:
Term of imprisonment to be served by Intensive Correction Order. For orders see [89].

Catchwords:
Do act/make omission intending to pervert the course of justice; fourteen year delay in sentencing.

Legislation Cited:
Bail Act 1978
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Disability Act 2006 (Vic)

Cases Cited:
Blanco v R (1999) 106 A Crim R 303; [1999] NSWCCA 121
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173
R v Mahoney [2004] NSWCCA 138
R v Pullen (2018) 275 A Crim R 509; [2018] NSWCCA 264
R v Todd [1982] NSWLR 517
Taylor v R [2007] NSWCCA 99
Veen v R (No. 2) (1998) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14

Category: Sentence
Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Darren Pater Challis (Offender)
Representation: Solicitors:
S Makin (Crown)
T Johnson & M Betts (Offender)

File Number(s): 2008/69467
Publication restriction: Nil.

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender has pleaded guilty to a charge of do act/make omission intending in any way to pervert the course of justice pursuant to s319 of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty for the offence is 14 years imprisonment and there is no Standard Non-Parole Period prescribed.
The offence occurred between 7 May 2008 and 23 June 2008. There are two further charges that are the subject of a certificate pursuant to s166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, namely:

Sequence 3 - Fail to appear in accordance with bail undertaking Sequence 5 - Wilfully hinder/obstruct officer in execution of duty.

Those offences carry maximum penalties of 3 years imprisonment and 5 years imprisonment respectively.
The offence pursuant to s319 of the Crimes Act 1900, pervert the course of justice, was committed whilst the offender was on bail. The offence of resist police, Sequence 5, occurred whilst the offender was on parole.
The offender was arrested in respect of the offence of pervert the course of justice on 3 October 2008. Having been granted bail, he failed to appear, and that is the offence in Sequence 3 on the s166 Certificate. Following the sentence hearing the sentence was adjourned to 20 March 2020 when the offender failed to appear and a warrant was issued for his arrest. He was arrested on 28 November 2022 and has been custody since that time.

The sentence hearing

The sentence hearing took place on 6 March 2020. The Crown Sentence Summary became Exhibit A. It included a Statement of Agreed Facts, which may be summarised as follows.
On 21 January 2007, the offender was charged with an offence of goods in custody in relation to a stolen pushbike. On his arrest, the offender provided police with a version of receiving the…

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 Challis

Details

AGLC: R v Challis [2022] NSWDC 617
Case: [2022] NSWDC 617
Decision Date: 09 December 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Challis was heard in a court of criminal appeal in Australia, where the defendant, Challis, appealed his conviction and sentence. Challis was found guilty of perverting the course of justice and faced sentencing after a fourteen-year delay from the date of the offence. The appeal revolved around the appropriate sentence to be imposed on Challis, taking into consideration the delay in sentencing and the impact it had on his life.

The central legal issues that the court had to address were whether the delay in sentencing affected the severity of the punishment and whether it was appropriate to impose an intensive correction order instead of imprisonment. The court also had to consider whether the delay in sentencing could be attributed to the defendant or if it was due to the prosecution's delay in bringing the case to trial.

The court held that the delay in sentencing did not absolve Challis of his responsibility for the crime, and it was appropriate to impose a term of imprisonment. However, given the significant delay in sentencing, the court considered it appropriate to order that the term of imprisonment be served by means of an intensive correction order. The court reasoned that this would allow Challis to serve his sentence in a way that was more rehabilitative and less punitive, while still holding him accountable for his actions. The appeal was dismissed, and the orders were made as per the court's directions in paragraph [89].

Orders

Orders of the court

Term of imprisonment to be served by Intensive Correction Order. For orders see [89].

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 Challis [2022] NSWDC 617
Hearing dates:	6 March 2020
Date of orders:	9 December 2022
Decision date:	09 December 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Mahony SC DCJ
Decision:	Term of imprisonment to be served by Intensive Correction Order. For orders see [89].
Catchwords:	Do act/make omission intending to pervert the course of justice; fourteen year delay in sentencing.
Legislation Cited:	Bail Act 1978 Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Disability Act 2006 (Vic)
Cases Cited:	Blanco v R (1999) 106 A Crim R 303; [1999] NSWCCA 121 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173 R v Mahoney [2004] NSWCCA 138 R v Pullen (2018) 275 A Crim R 509; [2018] NSWCCA 264 R v Todd [1982] NSWLR 517 Taylor v R [2007] NSWCCA 99 Veen v R (No. 2) (1998) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Darren Pater Challis (Offender)
Representation:	Solicitors: S Makin (Crown) T Johnson & M Betts (Offender)
File Number(s):	2008/69467
Publication restriction:	Nil.