R v Cuthel

[2016] ACTSC 91

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Cuthel

Citation:

[2016] ACTSC 91

Hearing Date:

25 February 2016

DecisionDate:

26 February 2016

Before:

Penfold J

Decision:

See [19] – [24].

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – proceedings for breach of good behaviour order – three separate good behaviour orders for different periods made in court – order implemented by single good behaviour order for longest period specified – breach occurred after first two good behaviour orders would have expired – re-sentencing necessary to ensure offender gets benefit of compliance with first two good behaviour orders as specified by court – breach offence did not indicate return to serious offending – offender otherwise making good progress with rehabilitation – offender re-sentenced – outstanding sentences again suspended subject to new good behaviour order.

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), s 86(1)

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

Dylan Roger Angus Cuthel (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel

Ms M Moss (Crown)

Mr A Doig (Offender)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

Darryl Perkins Solicitors (Offender)

File Numbers:

SCC 270 of 2011; SCC 304 of 2011; SCC 170 of 2013

Introduction

1. On 7 January 2014, I sentenced Dylan Cuthel for a burglary and associated theft, and re-sentenced him for 18 earlier offences for which the original sentences had been suspended subject to good behaviour orders.  All but two of those earlier offences were also burglaries or thefts, the other two being for damaging property and obtaining property by deception.

1. The outcome of that sentencing process was that Mr Cuthel was to remain in custody until 2 June 2014, after which sentences relating to a total of 13 offences, with a total outstanding period of 19 months imprisonment, were suspended subject to three different good behaviour orders for different periods.  Those periods were to expire:

(a)in respect of the first five of the outstanding sentences, on 2 December 2014;

(b)in respect of the next four of the outstanding sentences, on 2 June 2015; and

(c)in respect of the last four of the outstanding sentences, on 2 January this year.

1. However, despite the orders being made and recorded by the Court in clear terms, they were not implemented by the preparation of three separate good behaviour orders, and instead Mr Cuthel was required to sign a single good behaviour order for 19 months applying to all 13 offences. 

Breach of good behaviour orders

1. Mr Cuthel has since re-offended on two separate occasions:

(a)on 6 April 2015, in New South Wales, he committed an offence of driving with an illicit drug, specifically methamphetamine, in his system; and

(b)on 3 July 2015, in Queensland, he committed three traffic offences, curiously described as "drive uninsured vehicle, vehicles used on road must be registered, and did drive over general alcohol limit, but not over middle alcohol limit". 

1. In each State, he was convicted of the relevant offences, fined and subjected to a licence disqualification. 

1. Under s 86(1) of…