R v Cooper - [2022] NSWDC 682

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Cooper [2022] NSWDC 682
Hearing dates: 24 May 2022
Date of orders: 03 June 2022
Decision date: 03 June 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:
Specify a term of imprisonment of imprisonment of 4 year 6 months with a non-parole period of 2 years 4 months

Catchwords:
CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery intentionally inflicting actual bodily harm
SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment

Legislation Cited:
Children (Criminal Proceedings)Act 1987
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:
Bugmyv The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58
Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Clayton Cooper (Offender)
Representation:
Jason Lee (Solicitor for the ODPP)
Daniel Thomas (Solicitor for the Offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Limited (Offender)

File Number(s): 2021/00214478

REVISED EX TEMPORE JUDGEMENT

SENTENCE

AUDIO VISUAL LINK COMMENCED AT 9.34AM

This is the judgement on sentence for Clayton Cooper. Reference is 2021/00214478. Mr Thomas is on the screen, as is Mr Cooper from his place of confinement, and Mr Lee appears on behalf of the Crown.

INTRODUCTION

Clayton Cooper appears for sentence upon one charge. The matter was listed for hearing on 24 May 2022 when I was due to preside at the Bega sittings of the Court but held over in Sydney awaiting a verdict. The hearing was conducted remotely using AVL facilities between the courts in Sydney and Bega. After evidence and submissions, the hearing was adjourned to be concluded in Bega today, June 3, 2022.

THE OFFENCE

The offender pleaded guilty in the Local Court at Bega to the following offence. That he:

"On 20 July 2021 at Moruya in the State of New South Wales did rob John Duncan of certain property, namely one set of vehicle keys the property of John Duncan and at the time of the robbery intentionally inflicted actual bodily harm on the said John Duncan."

The offence is contrary to s 95(1) Crimes Act 1900. The offender adhered to his plea before me.

PENALTY

The maximum penalty for an offence contrary to s 95(1) Crimes Act 1900 is imprisonment for 20 years. There is no standard non-parole period for the purposes of Part 4 Div. 1A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

THE TIMING OF THE PLEA OF GUILTY

The offender pleaded guilty in the Local Court at Bega during committal proceedings on 28 February 2022. This is a matter to which Part 3 Div. 1A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 applies, and in accordance with s 25B(2)(a) the discount for the utility of the plea of guilty is 25% of the sentence that would have otherwise been imposed for the offence if not admitted.

PRE-SENTENCE CUSTODY

The offender was arrested on 27 July 2021 and has been in custody ever since. However, the custody to which he was subject was not solely referable to this offence.
The offender was released to parole on 25…

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 Cooper

Details

AGLC: R v Cooper [2022] NSWDC 682
Case: [2022] NSWDC 682
Decision Date: 03 June 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an appeal by the defendant, Cooper, against a sentence imposed for his involvement in a violent robbery where actual bodily harm was inflicted. The court of appeal was tasked with reviewing the sentence to ensure its proportionality and compliance with legal principles. The primary issue for the court was to determine whether the sentence imposed was excessive or manifestly inadequate. The court also had to consider the seriousness of the offence and the need to deter similar criminal conduct.

In examining the sentence, the court took into account the severity of the crime, the defendant's role in the offence, and his criminal history. The court emphasised that the sentence needed to reflect the gravity of the crime, which involved intentional violence resulting in actual bodily harm. The court also highlighted the importance of deterrence, both specific and general, in sentencing decisions for such serious offences. The appeal court reviewed the sentencing principles and applied them to the facts of the case, assessing the balance between the punishment and the crime committed.

Upon reviewing the evidence and the arguments presented, the appeal court found that the sentence was not manifestly inadequate. The court determined that the sentence of imprisonment for four years and six months, with a non-parole period of two years and four months, was appropriate given the nature and circumstances of the offence. The court concluded that the sentence adequately reflected the seriousness of the crime and served the purposes of punishment, deterrence, and protection of society. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

Specify a term of imprisonment of imprisonment of 4 year 6 months with a non-parole period of 2 years 4 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 Cooper [2022] NSWDC 682
Hearing dates:	24 May 2022
Date of orders:	03 June 2022
Decision date:	03 June 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:	Specify a term of imprisonment of imprisonment of 4 year 6 months with a non-parole period of 2 years 4 months
Catchwords:	CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery intentionally inflicting actual bodily harm SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment
Legislation Cited:	Children (Criminal Proceedings)Act 1987 Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Bugmyv The Queen [2013] HCA 37 Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Clayton Cooper (Offender)
Representation:	Jason Lee (Solicitor for the ODPP) Daniel Thomas (Solicitor for the Offender) Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Limited (Offender)
File Number(s):	2021/00214478