R v Filipetti - [2019] NSWDC 214

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Filipetti [2019] NSWDC 214
Hearing dates: 17 May 2019
Decision date: 17 May 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three years four months. Non parole period of two years two months.

Catchwords: SENTENCING – Sentencing factors – robbery – spontaneous offence – elderly victim – small amount taken – threats made – struggle - young offender – disadvantaged background – most of adult life in gaol – no experience of normal community life – need to learn how to live a normal community life – special circumstances conditional on State Parole Authority.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
Filippetti (1984) 13 A Crim R 335
R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346, 106 A Crim R 149
Texts Cited: "Does Imprisonment Deter? A Review of the Evidence" Sentencing Advisory Council, Victoria, 2011
Category: Sentence
Parties: Justin Aaron Filipetti (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr R Steward (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Ms A Kerr (For the Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2017/00273580

Judgment – ex tempore revised

At 8.24am on 27 June 2018, Mr Hill, aged 72, was driving with his wife as a passenger through a quiet suburban area of Lake Heights, south of Wollongong. Mr Hill saw a man standing beside the road. The man was indicating as if asking what the time was. Mr Hill pulled over and said to the man “It’s 8.24”.
The man walked to the driver’s side of the car, reached in the open window and tried to remove the keys from the ignition. Mr Hill tried to raise his window, but the ignition had been switched off and he could not. The door was opened. The man said “Get out of the car or I’ll stab ya”. Mr Hill tried to pull the door closed.
A short struggle then occurred about the door and the keys. Eventually, both gave up the struggle at the same time. The man walked away taking part of the key and an attached multi-tool. A local resident saw what occurred and called the police who were soon on the scene.
CCTV from the local area led the police to Justin Filipetti, who was well known to them. Filipetti was arrested on 28 August 2018. He has been in custody since that date. Filipetti had been released to parole on 19 April 2018. Such had been his negative response to parole supervision that an urgent breach report had been prepared and a breach warrant issued on 20 June 2018.
On 6 September 2018 police went to Silverwater gaol. Filipetti was formally arrested in relation to this matter. When the matter was in the Local Court he indicated that he would plead guilty. That plea was confirmed today. His assistance in resolving this matter, the utilitarian value of the…

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 Filipetti

Details

AGLC: R v Filipetti [2019] NSWDC 214
Case: [2019] NSWDC 214
Decision Date: 17 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Filipetti involved the defendant, who pleaded guilty to robbery. The victim, an elderly person, was threatened and struggled during the incident, although only a small amount was taken. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence, considering the defendant's disadvantaged background, the spontaneous nature of the offence, and his extensive history of incarceration. The defendant, who had spent most of his adult life in prison, had little experience of normal community life and was seen as someone who needed to learn how to live in such a community.

The primary legal issues were the appropriate sentencing factors to apply and how to balance the need for punishment and deterrence against the defendant's background and prospects for rehabilitation. The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the vulnerability of the victim, and the defendant's history of criminal behaviour. Additionally, the court had to determine whether any special circumstances were present that warranted a departure from the usual sentencing principles.

The court recognised the defendant's disadvantaged background and his lack of experience with normal community life as significant factors. However, it also emphasised the need for punishment and deterrence given the nature of the offence. The court concluded that while the defendant was not a typical offender, the seriousness of the robbery, especially given the victim's age, necessitated a significant custodial sentence. The court imposed a term of imprisonment of three years and four months, with a non-parole period of two years and two months. The special circumstances were conditional on the State Parole Authority.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three years four months. Non parole period of two years two 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 Filipetti [2019] NSWDC 214
Hearing dates:	17 May 2019
Decision date:	17 May 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three years four months. Non parole period of two years two months.
Catchwords:	SENTENCING – Sentencing factors – robbery – spontaneous offence – elderly victim – small amount taken – threats made – struggle - young offender – disadvantaged background – most of adult life in gaol – no experience of normal community life – need to learn how to live a normal community life – special circumstances conditional on State Parole Authority.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Filippetti (1984) 13 A Crim R 335 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346, 106 A Crim R 149
Texts Cited:	"Does Imprisonment Deter? A Review of the Evidence" Sentencing Advisory Council, Victoria, 2011
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Justin Aaron Filipetti (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr R Steward (for the offender) Solicitors: Ms A Kerr (For the Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2017/00273580