R v Collins - [2018] ACTSC 127

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Collins
Citation:	[2018] ACTSC 127
Hearing Date:	18 April 2018
DecisionDate:	18 April 2018
Before:	Murrell CJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a two year good behaviour order for each ACT offence and a two year conditional release order on same terms as ACT good behaviour orders for the Commonwealth offence.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – sexual intercourse with person under 16 years – using carriage service to transmit communications to person under 16 years with the intention of procuring sexual activity – no criminal history – five year age gap – good prospects of rehabilitation – neurodevelopmental issues – immature offender
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 55(2) Crimes Act1914 (Cth) ss 16A, 20 Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) s 35 Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 474.26(1)
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Samuel Collins (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel Ms J Campbell (Crown) Ms P Burgoyne-Scutts (Offender)P
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid ACT (Offender)
File Number:	SCC 290 of 2017

MURRELL CJ:

The offender committed four offences:

(a)6 November 2015: engaging in sexual intercourse with the complainant, a person under the age of 16 years.
(b)7 November 2015: engaging in sexual intercourse with the complainant, a person under the age of 16 years.
(c)11 November 2015: engaging in sexual intercourse with the complainant, a person under the age of 16 years.
(d)Between 1 September 2015 and 16 November 2015: being a person who was at least 18 years of age, using a carriage service to transmit communications to the complainant, who was under the age of 16 years, with the intention of procuring her to engage in sexual activity with him.

The maximum penalty for an offence of sexual intercourse with a person under 16 years contrary to s 55(2) of the Crimes Act1900 (ACT) (Crimes Act) is 14 years’ imprisonment. The maximum penalty for an offence of using a carriage service to procure a person under 16 years of age contrary to s 474.26(1) of the Criminal Code Act1995 (Cth) is 15 years’ imprisonment.

The offences were reported to the police within days of their occurrence. For reasons that are unclear, there was a 12 month delay in charging the offender. There was a further delay of almost 12 months before the offender was committed for trial because the defence was awaiting a report from Associate Professor Sunny Lah and the parties were discussing the appropriate charges. From the defence perspective, these discussions ultimately yielded no result. The second delay does not reflect any fault on the part of the prosecution.

On 18 October 2017, the offender was committed for trial. On 21 February 2018, he entered pleas of guilty. The pleas were entered prior to the matter being listed for trial. Having regard to the timing of the pleas, pursuant to s 35 of 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 Collins

Details

AGLC: R v Collins [2018] ACTSC 127
Case: [2018] ACTSC 127
Decision Date: 18 April 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Collins, was convicted of engaging in sexual intercourse with a person under 16 years of age, as well as using a carriage service to transmit communications to that person with the intention of procuring sexual activity. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia, which was asked to review the sentence imposed by the lower courts. The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentence for the crimes committed by the appellant, taking into account his age, criminal history, and prospects for rehabilitation.

The court considered the principles of sentencing in relation to sexual offences against minors, emphasising the importance of deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation. It was noted that the appellant had no prior criminal history and that there was a five-year age gap between him and the victim. The court also took into account the appellant's neurodevelopmental issues and immature state at the time of the offences. These factors were weighed against the seriousness of the crimes committed, and the court concluded that a sentence that focused on rehabilitation and reintegration into society was appropriate.

The court determined that a two-year good behaviour order for each of the Australian Capital Territory offences, and a two-year conditional release order on the same terms for the Commonwealth offence, was the most suitable sentence in this case. The orders were designed to address the appellant's rehabilitation needs while also serving the purposes of deterrence and denunciation. The court was satisfied that these orders would provide the best opportunity for the appellant to address the underlying issues that led to his offending behaviour and to reintegrate into society as a law-abiding citizen.

The final orders of the court were that the appellant be sentenced to a two-year good behaviour order for each of the ACT offences and a two-year conditional release order for the Commonwealth offence, both on the same terms as the ACT good behaviour orders. This decision reflects the court's consideration of the appellant's personal circumstances and the principles of sentencing in cases involving sexual offences against minors.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a two year good behaviour order for each ACT offence and a two year conditional release order on same terms as ACT good behaviour orders for the Commonwealth offence.

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.