R v Conrad James Loulanting - [2014] ACTSC 392

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Conrad James Loulanting
Citation:	[2014] ACTSC 392
Hearing Date(s):	26 November 2014
DecisionDate:	28 November 2014
Before:	Refshauge J
Decision:	1. The conviction for the offence of attempted aggravated robbery on 7 April 2006 be confirmed. 2. The breach of the good behaviour order made on 4 July 2012 is proved. 3. The good behaviour order made on 4 July 2012 be cancelled. 4. Conrad James Loulanting appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 3 June 2015 at 9:30 am to be sentenced for the offence of attempted aggravated robbery. 5. Conrad James Loulanting be released on bail on 1 December 2014 to appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 3 June 2015 at 9:30 am, with the following conditions: a. That he Conrad James Loulanting accept supervision by the Director-General, or her delegate, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him, including those concerning where he resides, his employment, and treatment and counselling for substance abuse, mental health and anger management; b. That he abstain from the use of illicit drugs and alcohol; c. That he submit, as and when required, to breath analysis and urinalysis; d. That report to the officer-in-charge of Tuggeranong Police Station every Wednesday and Saturday between the hours of 8:00 am and 8:00 pm; e. That he continue counselling with the Service Assisting Male Survivors of Sexual Assault and consent to the officers of that agency providing information about his counselling to the person supervising him; f. That he continue counselling with Directions ACT and consent to the officers of that agency giving information about his counselling to the persons supervising him; g. That he commence and remain in employment with ConneKt ProjeKts, and consent to the owners of that business providing details of his employment and behaviour to the persons supervising him; h. That he seek admission to an anger management course as approved by the person supervising him and, if admitted, continue in that course, and consent to the officers conducting the course providing information about his progress to the person supervising him. i. That he comply with any personal protection order that has been issued on the application of [redacted]; and j. That he appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 17 February 2015 at 9.30 am for a progress report.
Category:	Principal Judgment
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Judgement and Punishment – Re-sentencing following breach of GBO – Breach constituted by commission of further offence
Legislation Cited:	Bail Act 1992 (ACT) Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), ss 86, 110
Cases Cited:	Guy v Anderson [2013] ACTSC 5 Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506 R v Govinden (1999) 106 A Crim R 314 R v Locke and Paterson [1973] 6 SASR 298 R v Loulanting (Unreported, ACTSC, Madgwick J, 14 August 2002 R v Loulanting (Unreported, ACTSC, Crispin J, 16 April 2007 R v Loulanting (Unreported, ACTSC, Refshauge…

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 Conrad James Loulanting

Details

AGLC: R v Conrad James Loulanting [2014] ACTSC 392
Case: [2014] ACTSC 392
Decision Date: 28 November 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Conrad James Loulanting was convicted of attempted aggravated robbery and was subject to a good behaviour order (GBO) issued on 4 July 2012. The dispute centred around a breach of the GBO by Loulanting through the commission of a further offence, specifically attempted aggravated robbery on 7 April 2006. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, which was tasked with confirming the conviction, determining whether the breach of the GBO was proved, and considering the appropriate sentencing and bail conditions.

The court had to decide whether the evidence was sufficient to confirm Loulanting’s conviction for attempted aggravated robbery and whether the commission of this offence constituted a breach of the GBO. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate consequences of the breach, including the cancellation of the GBO and the formulation of bail conditions in light of the new offence.

The Supreme Court confirmed Loulanting’s conviction for attempted aggravated robbery and found that the breach of the GBO was proved. The court cancelled the GBO and ordered Loulanting to appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 3 June 2015 for sentencing. The court set stringent bail conditions, including supervision, abstaining from alcohol and illicit drugs, regular reporting to police, ongoing counselling, employment with specific conditions, and participation in an approved anger management course. Loulanting was also required to comply with any personal protection orders and appear for a progress report on 17 February 2015.

The final orders were that Loulanting’s conviction be confirmed, the breach of the GBO be proved, the GBO be cancelled, and Loulanting be released on bail with the aforementioned conditions until his sentencing hearing on 3 June 2015.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The conviction for the offence of attempted aggravated robbery on 7 April 2006 be confirmed.

2. The breach of the good behaviour order made on 4 July 2012 is proved.

3. The good behaviour order made on 4 July 2012 be cancelled.

4. Conrad James Loulanting appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 3 June 2015 at 9:30 am to be sentenced for the offence of attempted aggravated robbery.

5. Conrad James Loulanting be released on bail on 1 December 2014 to appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 3 June 2015 at 9:30 am, with the following conditions:

a. That he Conrad James Loulanting accept supervision by the Director-General, or her delegate, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him, including those concerning where he resides, his employment, and treatment and counselling for substance abuse, mental health and anger management;

b. That he abstain from the use of illicit drugs and alcohol;

c. That he submit, as and when required, to breath analysis and urinalysis;

d. That report to the officer-in-charge of Tuggeranong Police Station every Wednesday and Saturday between the hours of 8:00 am and 8:00 pm;

e. That he continue counselling with the Service Assisting Male Survivors of Sexual Assault and consent to the officers of that agency providing information about his counselling to the person supervising him;

f. That he continue counselling with Directions ACT and consent to the officers of that agency giving information about his counselling to the persons supervising him;

g. That he commence and remain in employment with ConneKt ProjeKts, and consent to the owners of that business providing details of his employment and behaviour to the persons supervising him;

h. That he seek admission to an anger management course as approved by the person supervising him and, if admitted, continue in that course, and consent to the officers conducting the course providing information about his progress to the person supervising him.

i. That he comply with any personal protection order that has been issued on the application of [redacted]; and

j. That he appear in the Supreme Court of the ACT on 17 February 2015 at 9.30 am for a progress report.

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.