District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Dale Anton Reynders [2016] NSWDC 107 Hearing dates: 24 May 2016 Decision date: 10 June 2016 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Mahony SC DCJ Decision: Full time custodial sentence. For orders see [83] – [85]
Catchwords: Assault occasioning actual bodily harm; assault police officer; multiple offences and aggregate sentencing Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Procedure Act 1986Cases Cited: Cahyadi v R [2007] NSWCCA 1
JM v R [2014] NSWCCA 297
Lukatela v Birch [2008] ACTSC 99
McIntosh v R [2015] NSWCCA 184
R v Caldwell [2016] NSWCCA 55
R v Rae [2013] NSWCCA 9
R v Van Ryn [2016] NSWCCA 1
Veen v R (No. 2) (1998) 164 CLR 465Category: Sentence Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Dale Anton Reynders (Offender)Representation: Solicitor:
Counsel:
G Gaynor (Crown)
G Denman (Offender)
File Number(s): 14/259939 Publication restriction: Nil
REMARKS ON SENTENCE
-
The offender, who was born on 29 June 1980, was committed for trial on 4 June 2015 from the Cooma Local Court. Guilty pleas were entered to the following offences at the Queanbeyan District Court on 7 March 2016:
Assault occasioning actual bodily harm pursuant to s 59(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is 5 years imprisonment.
Assault police officer pursuant to s 58 of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is 5 years imprisonment.
Cause grievous bodily harm to police officer and reckless as to causing actual bodily harm pursuant to s 60(3) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is 12 years and there is a standard non-parole period of 5 years.
Assault police officer and cause actual bodily harm pursuant to s 60(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is 7 years and there is a standard non-parole period of 3 years.
-
In addition, the offender has asked the court to take into account three charges on a Form 1. They are as follows:
Sequence 1 – Excluded person fail to leave premises.
Sequence 6 – Common assault.
Sequence 5 – Assault officer whilst in execution of duty.
-
The offences occurred on 4 September 2014 in the circumstances described below. The offender was arrested the same day and has spent one day in custody.
The sentence hearing
-
The sentence hearing took place at Queanbeyan District Court on 24 May 2016. The Crown bundle (Ex A), included a statement of Agreed Facts which may be summarised as follows. On the evening of Wednesday 4 September 2014, the offender was consuming alcohol at the Banjo Patterson Inn at Jindabyne. At 2.00am, the premises ceased trading and patrons were requested to leave. The offender was in the upper dance floor area and when requested to leave by security staff, he refused. He in fact refused on three occasions to leave. That conduct comprises the first offence on the Form 1.
-
After being asked to leave, the offender raised his right hand and pushed one of the security officers, Mr…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Dale Anton Reynders and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2016] NSWDC 107
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with addressing several key legal issues. Firstly, it had to ascertain whether the assault on the police officer constituted an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Secondly, the court needed to determine the appropriate aggregate sentence for the defendant's multiple offences, taking into account the cumulative impact of the crimes and their seriousness. The court also had to consider the principles of sentencing, particularly in relation to the need for deterrence and the protection of the community.
In delivering the judgment, the court meticulously examined the evidence and circumstances surrounding the assault. It concluded that the assault on the police officer did indeed occasion actual bodily harm, warranting a serious consideration of the defendant's culpability. The court further deliberated on the principles of aggregate sentencing, balancing the individual seriousness of each offence with the totality of the defendant's criminal conduct. The court found that a full-time custodial sentence was necessary to achieve the aims of punishment, deterrence, and the protection of the community. The final orders, detailed in paragraphs [83] to [85] of the judgment, mandated a full-time custodial sentence for the defendant.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full time custodial sentence. For orders see [83] – [85]
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.