R v Edwards - [2019] NSWDC 825

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Edwards [2019] NSWDC 825
Hearing dates: 1 & 12 November 2019
Decision date: 13 November 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Norrish QC DCJ
Decision:
I find the breaches proven. I revoke the s 12 bond. I fix a term of imprisonment of one year 9 months; non parole period 6 months.

Catchwords: CRIME – sentence – called up for breach of s 12 bond – admitted – domestic violence offences - common assault – intimidation – use carriage service to threaten to kill – deterioration of existing mental conditions – willingness to address drug use and comply with supervision requirements.
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act
Drug (Misuse and Trafficking) Act 1985
Cases Cited: Cooke (1993) 65 ACrimR 595
Cooke v R [2007] NSWCCA 184
R v Marston (1993) 60 SASR 320
R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228
DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Tyrel Edwards (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr Michie (Offender) - hearing
Mr Pierce (Offender) - decision
Solicitors:
Mr A Fiorenza (DPP)

File Number(s): 2016/00156324
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

Tyrel Edwards appears today having been called up in respect of alleged breaches of a s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act bond that I imposed on 21 November 2017 in relation to an offence contrary to s 25A Drug (Misuse and Trafficking) Act 1985. I imposed a sentence of one year nine months and I suspended it pursuant to s 12 of the Act.
I received notification some few months ago that there had been alleged breaches by reason of offences which are currently before the Local Court. Those matters have been listed a few times for sentence and are now, as I understand it, listed for next Friday. I understand the Local Court to be putting off dealing with those matters until the Court was aware of what the District Court was going to do with the matters for which the offender was on a bond at the time of the Local Court offences.
In this matter I have been aided by two different counsel representing the prisoner. Amongst the material provided to me, putting aside the Crown bundle for the moment, are an apology letter from the prisoner, a letter from the prisoner’s mother, psychological reports, three in number, dated 18 October and 30 October 2018 and 27 September 2019 and a report from a psychiatrist working with the Aboriginal Legal Service dated 6 February 2019. I do not propose to summarise that material but what is apparent is that since the prisoner was before me there has been a significant deterioration in his mental health and I am prepared to accept a diagnosis made by the psychiatrist of an existing complex post-traumatic stress disorder, a form of schizophrenia or schizoid condition, and a polysubstance abuse disorder, which I was aware of when he last appeared before me for sentence in November 2017.
The offences that constitute the breaches, which are…

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 Edwards

Details

AGLC: R v Edwards [2019] NSWDC 825
Case: [2019] NSWDC 825
Decision Date: 13 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Edwards, the respondent appeared before the court to address a breach of a bond imposed under section 12 of the relevant legislation. Edwards admitted to the breach, which stemmed from domestic violence offences including common assault, intimidation, and using a carriage service to threaten to kill. The respondent's mental health had deteriorated, and they were willing to address their drug use and comply with supervision requirements. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for these offences, considering the respondent's mental health and willingness to participate in rehabilitation programs.

The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate sentence for Edwards, who had breached a section 12 bond. The court had to weigh the severity of the offences, the respondent's mental health, and their expressed willingness to engage in treatment and supervision. The court also had to consider the deterrent effect of the sentence and the need to protect the community. In deciding the sentence, the court applied the principles of sentencing for domestic violence offences, considering the need for denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

The court found the breaches proven and revoked the section 12 bond. It imposed a term of imprisonment of one year and nine months, with a non-parole period of six months. The court emphasised the seriousness of the offences and the need for general deterrence, but also took into account the respondent's mental health issues and willingness to engage in rehabilitation. The court believed that the sentence would provide an appropriate balance between punishment and rehabilitation, taking into account all relevant factors.

Orders

Orders of the court

I find the breaches proven. I revoke the s 12 bond. I fix a term of imprisonment of one year 9 months; non parole period 6 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 Edwards [2019] NSWDC 825
Hearing dates:	1 & 12 November 2019
Decision date:	13 November 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Norrish QC DCJ
Decision:	I find the breaches proven. I revoke the s 12 bond. I fix a term of imprisonment of one year 9 months; non parole period 6 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME – sentence – called up for breach of s 12 bond – admitted – domestic violence offences - common assault – intimidation – use carriage service to threaten to kill – deterioration of existing mental conditions – willingness to address drug use and comply with supervision requirements.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act Drug (Misuse and Trafficking) Act 1985
Cases Cited:	Cooke (1993) 65 ACrimR 595 Cooke v R [2007] NSWCCA 184 R v Marston (1993) 60 SASR 320 R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Tyrel Edwards (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Michie (Offender) - hearing Mr Pierce (Offender) - decision Solicitors: Mr A Fiorenza (DPP)
File Number(s):	2016/00156324
Publication restriction:	No