R v Ellis

Case [2022] NSWDC 112


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v ELLIS [2022] NSWDC 112
Hearing dates: 8 April 2022
Date of orders: 14 April 2022
Decision date: 14 April 2022
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Priestley SC, DCJ
Decision:
  1. The offender, having been found guilty by a jury of the offence under section 94(a) is convicted of that offence.

  2. The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two years to date from 14 April 2022 and expiring 13 April 2024. That sentence is to be served by way of the imposition of an intensive correction order with conditions (See Judgement) 

  3. The offender is convicted of the three charges under section 10 of the drugs misuse and trafficking act.

  4. In respect of each charge, a community correction order of 12 months is imposed on the standard conditions 

Catchwords:

CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery

CRIME — Drug offences — Possess prohibited drug 

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act1900 (NSW)

Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1995 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Lai v R [2021] NSWCCA 217

Karout v R [2019] NSWCCA 253

Blanch [2019] NSWCCA 304

Category:Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Ellis (Offender)
Representation: Morters SC Counsel for the DPP
Segal Counsel for the Accused
File Number(s): 2020/00257051
Publication restriction: Unrestricted

Reasons on sentence 

  1. Keysha Ellis appears for sentence having been found guilty by a jury on one count under section 94(a) of the Crimes Act that on 5 August 2020 she did rob David Metcalf of $480 cash and an amount of prescription medication. The maximum sentence for that offence is 14 years imprisonment. I take that maximum penalty into account as the legislative guidepost to assist in arriving at the appropriate sentence. There is no standard non-parole period.

  2. There are no matters to be dealt with by way of the form 1 procedure. There is however a section 166 certificate in respect of three related offences. Each of those offences is of possessing drugs on 3 September 2020. The drugs were 2 g of cannabis, .2 g of alprazolam and .52 g of methylphenidate. Each of those matters is an offence under section 10(1) of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act and in respect of which in each case there is a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and or 20 penalty units.

  3. The offender was arrested on 3 September 2020 and was released on bail. No time has been spent in custody.

  4. There is a co-offender namely Daniel Ashenhurst. He is the father of the offender’s three children and the offender and co-offender have been in a long term relationship the status of which is not entirely clear. An apprehended domestic violence order has been made with the offender as the person in need of protection and the co offender the defendant. The co-offender was convicted of the more serious charge under section 97 (1) of being armed with an offensive weapon namely a knife to commit the robbery in question. The maximum sentence for that offence Is 20 years. He…

Continue reading R v Ellis

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Ellis [2022] NSWDC 112
Case
[2022] NSWDC 112
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Ellis, the defendant faced multiple charges, including robbery under section 94(a) of the Crimes Act and possession of a prohibited drug under section 10 of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act. The defendant's guilt was determined by a jury on the robbery charge, and the court found the defendant guilty on the drug charges as well. The court was required to decide both the guilt of the defendant and the appropriate sentencing for the offences committed.

The legal issues before the court included the interpretation of the relevant sections of the Crimes Act and the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act, as well as the appropriate sentencing principles to apply in this case. The court had to consider the nature and circumstances of the offences, the defendant's criminal history, and the principles of justice and deterrence in determining the sentence.

The court found that the evidence supported the defendant's conviction on the robbery charge and the drug possession charges. The sentencing was considered in light of the defendant's offending history and the need to deter similar criminal activity. The court imposed a term of imprisonment for the robbery charge, which was to be served as an intensive correction order. For the drug possession charges, the court imposed a community correction order for each charge, with standard conditions. The court's reasoning was based on the need to balance the principles of punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation in sentencing the defendant.

The final orders included a conviction for the robbery charge, a two-year imprisonment sentence to be served as an intensive correction order, and convictions for the drug possession charges with community correction orders of 12 months each.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

The offender, having been found guilty by a jury of the offence under section 94(a) is convicted of that offence.

2.

The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two years to date from 14 April 2022 and expiring 13 April 2024. That sentence is to be served by way of the imposition of an intensive correction order with conditions (See Judgement)

3.

The offender is convicted of the three charges under section 10 of the drugs misuse and trafficking act.

4.

In respect of each charge, a community correction order of 12 months is imposed on the standard conditions

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.