CITATION: R v ENGLISH [2010] NSWDC 308 HEARING DATE(S): 5 November 2010 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 5 November 2010 JURISDICTION: Criminal JUDGMENT OF: Berman SC DCJ DECISION: The overall term is one consisting of a non-parole period of five years, and a total overall term of seven and a half years. CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Aggravated take and drive a motor vehicle with a person whilst armed with a weapon - Armed robbery - Carjacking - Aggravated assault - Offender on bail at the time of the commission of the offence - Form 1 CASES CITED: R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346; (1999) 106 A Crim R PARTIES: The Crown
Robert Cecil EnglishFILE NUMBER(S): DC 2009/191250; DC 2009/194437 SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions
Legal Aid Commission
SENTENCE
1 HIS HONOUR: Robert Cecil English appears for sentence today after having pleaded guilty, in this Court shortly before his trial was due to commence, to three serious offences. The first is an offence of aggravated take and drive a motor vehicle with a person whilst armed with a weapon. That has a maximum penalty of fourteen years with a standard non-parole period of five years. The second offence is an offence of armed robbery, carrying a maximum penalty of twenty years. Although it is the second on the Crown’s sentence summary it appears to have been committed shortly after the offence which is third on the Crown sentence summary, another offence of armed robbery with a maximum penalty of twenty years imprisonment. When I sentence him for the second armed robbery on the Crown sentence summary Mr English asks that I take into account a matter on a Form 1, that being an additional offence related to carjacking and aggravated assault with intent to take or drive a motor vehicle. The three offences for which the offender must be specifically sentenced all occurred on the same day, 7 July 2009, whilst the matter on the Form 1 occurred a little while thereafter, 25 August 2009.
2 On 7 July Mr English was under the influence of both Xanax and heroin. His intoxication by those drugs probably had a part to play in his decision to commit the three offences on that day. His ability to think rationally was clearly affected by the drugs that he had taken. He decided that he would commit an offence of armed robbery but he needed to get a getaway car. He therefore waited in the Westfield car park at Hurstville. At about 4.20 that day a woman drove into the car park and parked her car. The offender approached the driver. He placed a knife to her stomach, told her to give him the car keys and her handbag. Not surprisingly the victim did as she was told. Mr English then got into her car and drove away. The victim’s handbag, which was in the car, contained about $180 in cash and various other personal items.
3 A little while thereafter…
Continue reading R v English
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v English [2010] NSWDC 308
- Case
- [2010] NSWDC 308
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around the appropriate sentence for these serious criminal offences, particularly given the appellant's prior criminal history and the fact that the offences were committed while on bail. The court had to consider the gravity of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, the impact on the victims, and the principles of sentencing for repeat offenders.
The Supreme Court of Victoria, in delivering its judgment, acknowledged the severity of the offences and the need for a sentence that would adequately reflect the gravity of the crimes committed. The court emphasised the need to protect the community and to ensure that the sentence would act as a deterrent. The court also took into account the appellant's prior criminal history and the fact that the offences were committed while on bail, which indicated a disregard for the legal system. The court determined that an overall term consisting of a non-parole period of five years, and a total overall term of seven and a half years, was appropriate.
The court made clear that the sentence imposed was intended to reflect the seriousness of the offences, to protect the community, and to provide a deterrent against future criminal conduct. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to the principles of sentencing and ensuring that the sentence was proportionate to the gravity of the crimes committed.
Orders
Orders of the court
The overall term is one consisting of a non-parole period of five years, and a total overall term of seven and a half years.
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.