R v Ebsworth - [2024] NSWDC 377

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v EBSWORTH [2024] NSWDC 377
Hearing dates: 23 August 2024
Date of orders: 23 August 2024
Decision date: 23 August 2024
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Everson SC, DCJ
Decision:
(1) The offender is convicted of charge sequences 1, 4, 6 and 8 on the Amended Charge Certificate dated 24 April 2024.
(2) I impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 5 years 9 months that expires on 12 May 2029.
(3) I impose a non-parole period of 3 years 3 months that expires on 12 November 2026.
(4) I refer the offender to the Drug Court to determine whether he should be the subject of a compulsory drug treatment order.

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v the Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR
Fisher v R [2021] NSWCCA 92
R v Hamilton (1993) 66 A Crim R 575
R v Hearne [2001] NSWCCA 37
R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
Lloyd v The Queen [2022] NSWCCA 18
R v McNaughton (2006) 66 NSWLR 566
R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex
Brandon Ebsworth
Representation:
Counsel: Ms R Thampapillai (for Brandon Ebsworth)
Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) for the Crown;
Karim Criminal Defence Lawyers for the offender.

File Number(s): 2023/00223807
Publication restriction: There is a self-executing statutory non-publication order prohibiting the publication of any information that may reveal criminal offending by or towards the offender when he was a child.

JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

Brandon Ebsworth is before this Court pursuant to the Amended Charge Certificate dated 24 April 2024. He is to be sentenced on the four principal offences set out in that charge certificate, each of which is an offence contrary to sections of the Crimes Act 1900, committed on 13 July 2023:-

Charge sequence 1 is the offence of failing to stop whilst pursued by police and driving dangerously, contrary to sub-section 51B(1). The maximum penalty for that offence is imprisonment for 5 years.

Charge sequence 4 is the offence of using an offensive weapon to prevent his lawful apprehension, contrary to sub-section 33B(1)(a). The maximum penalty for that offence is imprisonment for 12 years.

Charge sequences 6 and 8 are offences of assaulting, and thereby occasioning actual bodily harm to, respectively Constable Graham and Senior Constable Furner, in the execution of their duty, contrary to sub-section 60(2). The maximum penalty for that offence is imprisonment for 7 years and a standard non-parole period of 3 years is prescribed.

Mr Ebsworth pleaded guilty to those offences in the Local Court at Penrith on 26 April 2024 and he has previously and personally adhered to those guilty pleas in this Court. In addition to those four principal offences, the prosecutor has filed in Court a Form 1 document, listing additional charges, to which the offender has admitted…

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 Ebsworth

Details

AGLC: R v Ebsworth [2024] NSWDC 377
Case: [2024] NSWDC 377
Decision Date: 23 August 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Ebsworth involved the offender, Ebsworth, who was charged with multiple offences under the criminal law. The nature of the dispute was the determination of his guilt on specified charge sequences and the imposition of an appropriate sentence. The matter was heard in a higher court in Australia, where the presiding judge assessed the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The legal issues before the court encompassed the validity of the charges against Ebsworth, the appropriate quantum of sentence, and the applicability of a compulsory drug treatment order.

The court was required to meticulously evaluate the evidence presented to ascertain Ebsworth's culpability for the offences detailed in the charge sequences. This involved a careful review of the prosecution's case, which included witness testimonies, documentary evidence, and any other relevant material. Furthermore, the court had to consider the defence submissions and any mitigating factors that Ebsworth's legal team put forth. The court also needed to determine the appropriate sentence, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, the principles of sentencing, and any relevant statutory guidelines. Additionally, the court had to decide whether Ebsworth should be referred to the Drug Court for a compulsory drug treatment order, given the potential relevance of drug dependency to his offending behaviour.

In delivering the judgment, the court found Ebsworth guilty of charge sequences 1, 4, 6, and 8. The court imposed an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for 5 years and 9 months, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 3 months. The judge also referred Ebsworth to the Drug Court to assess whether he should be subject to a compulsory drug treatment order. This referral recognises the importance of addressing any underlying drug dependency that may have contributed to his criminal behaviour, aiming for rehabilitation and potentially reducing recidivism. The detailed sentencing and referral reflect the court's balanced approach to ensuring justice and public safety while considering the offender's rehabilitation needs.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The offender is convicted of charge sequences 1, 4, 6 and 8 on the Amended Charge Certificate dated 24 April 2024.

(2) I impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 5 years 9 months that expires on 12 May 2029.

(3) I impose a non-parole period of 3 years 3 months that expires on 12 November 2026.

(4) I refer the offender to the Drug Court to determine whether he should be the subject of a compulsory drug treatment order.

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 EBSWORTH [2024] NSWDC 377
Hearing dates:	23 August 2024
Date of orders:	23 August 2024
Decision date:	23 August 2024
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Everson SC, DCJ
Decision:	(1) The offender is convicted of charge sequences 1, 4, 6 and 8 on the Amended Charge Certificate dated 24 April 2024. (2) I impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 5 years 9 months that expires on 12 May 2029. (3) I impose a non-parole period of 3 years 3 months that expires on 12 November 2026. (4) I refer the offender to the Drug Court to determine whether he should be the subject of a compulsory drug treatment order.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v the Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR Fisher v R [2021] NSWCCA 92 R v Hamilton (1993) 66 A Crim R 575 R v Hearne [2001] NSWCCA 37 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Lloyd v The Queen [2022] NSWCCA 18 R v McNaughton (2006) 66 NSWLR 566 R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex Brandon Ebsworth
Representation:	Counsel: Ms R Thampapillai (for Brandon Ebsworth) Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) for the Crown; Karim Criminal Defence Lawyers for the offender.
File Number(s):	2023/00223807
Publication restriction:	There is a self-executing statutory non-publication order prohibiting the publication of any information that may reveal criminal offending by or towards the offender when he was a child.