R v Creighton - [2020] NSWDC 794

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Creighton [2020] NSWDC 794
Hearing dates: 18 September 2020
Date of orders: 18 September 2020
Decision date: 18 December 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: W Hunt DCJ
Decision:
The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment. There is to be a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 months.

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Form 1 – Grievous bodily harm – Reckless wounding – Assault occasioning actual bodily harm – Resist officer in the execution of his duty – On conditional liberty at time of offending

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] 249 CLR 571 40.
Jinnette v R [2012] NSWCCA 217
Pearce v R [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610; 156 ALR 684
R v Callaghan [2006] NSWCCA 58
R v Fernando (1992) 76 ACrimR 58

Category: Sentence
Parties: The Crown
James Andrew Creighton
Representation: Counsel:
A Bowens – The Crown
S Bouveng – The offender
Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions
Legal Aid Commission

File Number(s): 2019/00020182

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: These are ex tempore reasons for sentence delivered on the day that I considered evidence and read and heard the submissions of the parties in relation to James Creighton and his offending.
Mr Creighton is before the Court for four substantive offences.
The first is that he caused grievous bodily harm to Tamisha Miller with the intent to do so in breach of s 33 subs (1)(b) of the Crimes Act. That matter has a maximum penalty of 25 years and a standard non-parole period of seven years.
The second offence is an offence of recklessly wounding Lisa Creighton in breach of s 35 subs (4) of the Crimes Act which matter carries a maximum penalty of seven years and a standard non-parole period of three years.
The third offence is causing grievous bodily harm to Ricky Cloake with intent to do so, again in breach of s 33(1)(b) of the Crimes Act with a maximum penalty of 25 years and a standard non-parole period of five years.
The fourth and final offence is an offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm on Joseph Brennan in breach of s 59 subs (1) of the Crimes Act which matter carries a maximum penalty of five years and no standard non-parole period has application.
I have signed a Form 1 having confirmed with Mr Creighton earlier today that he acknowledges his guilt in relation to an offence of resist officer in the execution of his duty which offence, on indictment, has a maximum penalty of five years and he confirmed that he wanted me to take that into account when I come to sentence him on count 3 and I will do so.
The position is that Mr Creighton was committed for trial to commence on 11 September 2020 from Tamworth Local Court in relation to charges that caught the criminality at counts 1 to…

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 Creighton

Details

AGLC: R v Creighton [2020] NSWDC 794
Case: [2020] NSWDC 794
Decision Date: 18 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The respondent, Creighton, appealed against his sentence following a conviction for several offences, including assault occasioning actual bodily harm, reckless wounding, and resisting a police officer. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal. The appeal centred on the sentence imposed by the trial judge, with the respondent arguing that it was manifestly excessive.

The court examined whether the sentence was outside the range of sentences that could be regarded as reasonable in all the circumstances. It considered the gravity of the offences, including the respondent's history of offending while on conditional liberty, and the need to deter the respondent and others from committing similar crimes. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, taking into account the totality of the offending and the need to protect the community.

The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld. The court emphasised the importance of the sentence reflecting the seriousness of the offences and the need to deter the respondent and others from engaging in such criminal conduct. The final orders were as previously determined by the trial judge, with an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment, including a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 months.

Orders

Orders of the court

The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment. There is to be a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 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 Creighton [2020] NSWDC 794
Hearing dates:	18 September 2020
Date of orders:	18 September 2020
Decision date:	18 December 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	W Hunt DCJ
Decision:	The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment. There is to be a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 months.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Form 1 – Grievous bodily harm – Reckless wounding – Assault occasioning actual bodily harm – Resist officer in the execution of his duty – On conditional liberty at time of offending
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen [2013] 249 CLR 571 40. Jinnette v R [2012] NSWCCA 217 Pearce v R [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610; 156 ALR 684 R v Callaghan [2006] NSWCCA 58 R v Fernando (1992) 76 ACrimR 58
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown James Andrew Creighton
Representation:	Counsel: A Bowens – The Crown S Bouveng – The offender Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions Legal Aid Commission
File Number(s):	2019/00020182