Legal Research
Cases
R v Garay (No 4)

R v Garay (No 4)

Case [2022] ACTSC 138 10 June 2022

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Garay (No 4)
Citation:	[2022] ACTSC 138
Hearing Dates:	22 October 2021, 4 March 2022 and 10 June 2022
DecisionDate:	10 June 2022
Before:	Loukas-Karlsson J
Decision:	See [229]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – historic child sexual offences – act of indecency on young person – sexual intercourse with a young person – s 35(4) Sentencing Act – discount for assistance in investigation – consideration of principles in Newby – COVID-19 – hardship and effect on offender’s family and dependants
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) ss 55, 65, 92E, 92K Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 6, 7, 10, 11, 33, 34A, 78 Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) s 68B
Cases Cited:	Barrett v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 38 Bloxsome v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 52 Blundell v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 34 Cahyadi v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 1; 168 A Crim R 41 Cavanagh v The Queen [2009] NSWCCA 174 Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67; 209 CLR 1 CX v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 37 Dawson v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 9 Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 Einfeld v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 87; 200 A Crim R 1 Filippou v The Queen [2015] HCA 29; 256 CLR 47 Fisher v The Queen (1989) 40 A Crim R 442 Gore v R; Hunter v R [2010] NSWCCA 330 GS v The Queen [2016] NSWCCA 266 Jurj v The Queen [2016] VSCA 57 Hampton v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 278; 208 A Crim R 478 Henry v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 5 Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Le v R [2019] NSWCCA 181 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Miles v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 41 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14 Monfries v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 46 Munda v Western Australia [2013] HCA 38; 249 CLR 600 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; 244 CLR 120 O’Brien v The Queen [2015] ACTCA 47 Pearce v The Queen [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610 Postiglione v The Queen [1997] HCA 26; 189 CLR 295 R v Appleby [2021] ACTSC 55 R v Barber [2021] ACTSC 78 R v BC (No 4) [2021] ACTSC 119 R v Bernath (1997) 1 VR 271 R v BJW [2000] NSWCCA 60; 112 A Crim R 1 R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121; 106 A Crim R 303 R v Clinch (1994) 72 A Crim R 301 R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272 R v DB [2015] ACTSC 28 R v DK [2016] ACTCA 7 R v DU (No 4) [2020] ACTSC 174 R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC…

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 Garay (No 4)

Details

AGLC: R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138
Case: [2022] ACTSC 138
Decision Date: 10 June 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal heard by the Court of Appeal was brought by the respondent, Garay, against a sentence handed down by a primary judge. Garay was convicted of several historic child sexual offences, including an act of indecency on a young person and sexual intercourse with a young person. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for the respondent, considering the principles set out in Newby, the discount for assistance provided to the investigation, the effect of COVID-19 on the respondent’s family and dependants, and other relevant factors.

The legal issues before the court included the appropriate discount for assistance in the investigation, the effect of the delay in prosecution on the sentence, and the impact of COVID-19 on the offender’s family and dependants. The court was also required to consider the principles outlined in the case of Newby to determine the appropriate sentence for the respondent’s offences.

In delivering the judgment, the court considered the principles in Newby, which emphasise the need to impose a sentence that is proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the offender’s culpability. The court found that the respondent had provided substantial assistance to the investigation, which warranted a discount in the sentence. However, the court also noted the seriousness of the offences and the need to deter and protect the community. After weighing all the relevant factors, the court determined that the appropriate sentence for the respondent was imprisonment for a total of seven years and eight months, with a non-parole period of five years and one month. The court also ordered that the sentence be backdated to the date of the respondent’s arrest.

The court made orders for the sentence to be backdated to the date of the respondent’s arrest, and for the respondent to serve a total of seven years and eight months in prison, with a non-parole period of five years and one month. The court also ordered that the respondent be subject to a number of other conditions, including a sex offender registration order and a restraining order.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [229]

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138

Most Recent Citation

R v Snowden [2022] ACTSC 186

Cases citing this decision · 9 of 9 shown

Director of Public Prosecutions v Tate
[2025] ACTSC 327

…7] ACTSC 32 R v Bennett [2017] ACTSC 104 R v Buckman (1987) 47 SASR 303 R v Curtis (No 2) [2016] ACTSC 34 R v Elphick [2021] ACTSC 9 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 R v Hancock [2021] ACTSC 52 R v Hughes (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 344 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v Lindsay [2020] ACTCA 25 R v Miller [2019] ACT…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Death
[2025] ACTSC 38

…roukas [2021] ACTSC 172 R v Booth [2004] ACTCA 21 R v Denniss [2021] ACTSC 15 R v Dunn [2019] ACTSC 75 R v Elzakhem [2008] NSWCCA 31 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 R v Howsan [2020] ACTSC 172 R v Hudson [2019] ACTSC 110 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v Lindsay [2020] ACTCA 25 R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381; 1…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Cook
[2024] ACTSC 379

…Azzopardi v The Queen [2011] VSCA 372; 35 VR 43 DPP v Doughty [2023] ACTSC 397 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 DPP v Gilbey; DPP v Goodwin [2024] ACTSC 265 DPP v Gleeson [2022] ACTSC 309 DPP v Gleeson (No 2) [2022] ACTSC 311 DPP v JJ (No 2) [2024] ACTSC 74 DPP v Moala (No 3) [2023] ACTSC 306 Forster-Jones v The Q…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Singh
[2024] ACTSC 202

…CA 47; 19 ACTLR 244 Pearce v The Queen [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610 R v Donnelly [2021] ACTSC 336 R v Forrest (No 2) [2017] ACTSC 83 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 R v Hopkins [2004] NSWCCA 105 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v Miller [2019] ACTCA 25 R v Mooney [2017] ACTSC 358 R v Morris [2017] ACTSC 400 R…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Krutsky (No 2)
[2024] ACTSC 120

…CLR 610 R v Carberry; R v Deng; Carberry v The King [2023] ACTCA 32 R v Collier [2022] ACTSC 18 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 R v Gordon [2022] ACTCA 48 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Johnson [2003] NSWCCA 129 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v Knight [2005] NSWCCA 253…
DPP v Stewart
[2023] ACTSC 252

…CA 32 R v Cichacz [2022] ACTSC 28 R v Crawford (No 1) [2020] ACTSC 245 R v Deng [2022] ACTSC 143 R v Featherstone [2019] ACTSC 218 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 R v GBD [2018] QCA 340; 342 FLR 244 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v Leka [2017] SASCFC 77 R v Lindsay [2020] ACTCA 25 R v McCallum [2020] ACTS…
Garay v the Queen (No 3)
[2023] ACTCA 2

…9 Pell v The Queen [2020] HCA 12; 268 CLR 123 Pollard v RRR Corporation Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 110 R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 215 R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 R v SLJ [2010] VSCA 16; 24 VR 372 R v Vunilagi; R v Vatanitawake; R v Masivesi; R v Macanawai (No 2) [2020] ACTSC 274 S v The Queen [1989] HCA 66; 168…
R v Porter (No 3)
[2022] ACTSC 236 Para 1

…the approach taken in Swift . Indeed, this course has previously been followed by judges of this Court including in Loeschnauer and R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 ( Garay (No 4) ).…
R v Snowden
[2022] ACTSC 186 Para 1

…ime that his offending was discovered. Admissions form part of the evidence upon which an assessment of the Crown case must be made: R v Garay (No 4) [2022] ACTSC 138 at [114].…

View all 9 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 50 of 84 shown

Rossi v R
[2024] NSWCCA 17 Para 1

…s that the principle of totality has developed, in part, to avoid a court imposing a “crushing sentence”: see also the observations of King CJ in R v Rossi (1988) 142 LSJS 451 at 453.…
Higgins v The Queen
[2022] ACTCA 26 Para 1

…nciples outlined in R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 240 which are applicable in the ACT: Ngata v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 18 at [18]-[21]; Higgins v The Queen [2022] ACTCA 26 ( Higgins ) at [40]-[43].…
R v Newby
[2022] ACTCA 20 Para 1

…After initial submissions, the Court of Appeal delivered its reasons in R v Newby [2022] ACTCA 20 ( Newby ). Given the decision discussed s 35(4) and the meaning of “overwhelmingly strong”, I invited the parties to provide further written and oral submissions on the application of the case to this proceeding.…
R v McCall
[2022] NSWDC 78 Para 1

…ll continue to make the offender more vulnerable to the virus. Counsel for the offender also referred me to a NSW District Court Case: R v McCall [2022] NSWDC 78 where Haesler DCJ considered the restrictions in family visits caused by the pandemic as relevant to sentence (at [70]). Counsel for the offender general…
R v Francis
[2021] ACTSC 212 Para 1

…offence, counsel for the offender referred me to four comparable cases: R v White [2016] ACTSC 237; R v Kelly [2014] ACTSC 117 ( Kelly ); R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 and R v DB [2015] ACTSC 28. All four cases concerned a greater number of files/images. In three of the cases, the period of imprisonment imposed was…
R v Garay (No 3)
[2021] ACTSC 215 Para 1

…dence to establish that a second trip to Thredbo had taken place and that the application should be granted with respect to count 7: R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 215 at [336] ( Garay (No 3) ).…
R v BC (No 4)
[2021] ACTSC 119 Para 1

…In support of their ultimate submission, counsel for the offender referred to the decision in R v BC (No 4) [2021] ACTSC 119 at [65]-[93] where I considered the provision. Counsel for the offender submitted that the following principles emerge from that judgment. First, that the Court is required to consider the im…
R v Phoumthipphavong
[2021] ACTSC 97 Para 1

…hener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 and R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 ( Phoumthipphavong ). Counsel for the offender correctly submitted that these cases were generally not comparable to the present case on two bases. F…
R v Barber
[2021] ACTSC 78 Para 1

…osecution referred me to eight cases concerning offenders sentenced for child exploitation material offences: R v Appleby [2021] ACTSC 55; R v Barber [2021] ACTSC 78; R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272; R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Sutton […
R v Appleby
[2021] ACTSC 55 Para 1

…The prosecution referred me to eight cases concerning offenders sentenced for child exploitation material offences: R v Appleby [2021] ACTSC 55; R v Barber [2021] ACTSC 78; R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272; R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Su…
R v Mitchener
[2019] ACTSC 351 Para 1

…f videos was low compared with other cases, the videos were lengthy and involved real children. The prosecution referred to the case of R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 at [13].…
Bloxsome v The Queen
[2020] ACTCA 52 Para 1

…Counsel for the offender referred to the ACT Court of Appeal decision in Bloxsome v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 52 ( Bloxsome ), where the Court considered the impact of COVID-19 when resentencing the offender at [49]-[54]. In that decision, the Court noted that it was “impossible” to predict how the pandemic would aff…
R v Davison
[2020] ACTSC 272 Para 1

…t cases concerning offenders sentenced for child exploitation material offences: R v Appleby [2021] ACTSC 55; R v Barber [2021] ACTSC 78; R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272; R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 and R v Phoumth…
Ngata v The Queen
[2020] ACTCA 18 Para 1

…the offender. Counsel also referred me to the principles outlined in R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 240 which are applicable in the ACT: Ngata v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 18 at [18]-[21]; Higgins v The Queen [2022] ACTCA 26 ( Higgins ) at [40]-[43].…
R v DU (No 4)
[2020] ACTSC 174

…CCA 121; 106 A Crim R 303 R v Clinch (1994) 72 A Crim R 301 R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272 R v DB [2015] ACTSC 28 R v DK [2016] ACTCA 7 R v DU (No 4) [2020] ACTSC 174 R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 215 R v Goboly [2016] ACTSC 322 R v Horton-Hegarty [2018] ACTCA 22 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWL…
Blundell v The Queen
[2019] ACTCA 34 Para 1

…plea of guilty has utilitarian benefit: R v Williams [2019] ACTSC 298 at [3] (Murrell CJ) as endorsed by the Court of Appeal in Blundell v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 34) in obviating the need for the Court to view at least some of the child exploitation material or for witnesses to be called to give evidence in relat…
R v Williams
[2019] ACTSC 298 Para 1

…Despite that finding, it is nevertheless correct to state that the plea of guilty has utilitarian benefit: R v Williams [2019] ACTSC 298 at [3] (Murrell CJ) as endorsed by the Court of Appeal in Blundell v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 34) in obviating the need for the Court to view at least some of the child exploitation…
R v Marsh
[2019] ACTSC 251

…R 374 R v Kelly [2014] ACTSC 117 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v KS [2018] ACTSC 220 R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381; 167 A Crim R 159 R v Marsh [2019] ACTSC 251 R v McCall [2022] NSWDC 78 R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 R v Newby [2022] ACTCA 20 R v Ngerengere (No 3) [2016] ACTSC 299 R v Payne [2015] ACTSC 345 R…
Le v R
[2019] NSWCCA 181 Para 1

…The Court in Newby did not consider the later NSW Court of Criminal Appeal decision which discussed discounts for admissions: Le v R [2019] NSWCCA 181 ( Le ). I note that the equivalent NSW provision has similar wording to s 36, nevertheless, as discussed above, it must be said there is a different legislative conte…
R v Fangaloka
[2019] NSWCCA 173 Para 1

…The prosecution also referred me to the case of R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173 ( Fangaloka ) at [64] where Basten JA stated:…
R v Walker
[2019] ACTSC 172 Para 1

…nces: R v Appleby [2021] ACTSC 55; R v Barber [2021] ACTSC 78; R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272; R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 and R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 ( Phoumthipphavong ). Counsel for the offender co…
Dawson v The Queen
[2019] ACTCA 9 Para 1

…In Dawson v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 9 ( Dawson ), the Court of Appeal set out the approach that should be taken regarding concurrency and accumulation when sentencing an offender for multiple offences at [37]:…
Henry v The Queen
[2019] ACTCA 5 Para 1

…As the Court of Appeal noted in Henry v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 5 at [36]-[37], citing with approval Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14; R v Bernath (1997) 1 VR 271 and Toumo’ua , the appropriate non-parole period is not decided by some mathematical relationship. Rather, a Court must consider a range of factors i…
DPP v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym)
[2018] HCA 41 Para 1

…za) of the Sentencing Act . I further note that, as the High Court stated in Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 at [4]:…
R v KS
[2018] ACTSC 220

…ACTSC 322 R v Horton-Hegarty [2018] ACTCA 22 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Kelly [2014] ACTSC 117 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v KS [2018] ACTSC 220 R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381; 167 A Crim R 159 R v Marsh [2019] ACTSC 251 R v McCall [2022] NSWDC 78 R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 R v Newby [2022] ACTCA…
R v Horton-Hegarty
[2018] ACTCA 22

…CTCA 7 R v DU (No 4) [2020] ACTSC 174 R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 215 R v Goboly [2016] ACTSC 322 R v Horton-Hegarty [2018] ACTCA 22 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Kelly [2014] ACTSC 117 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v KS [2018] ACTSC 220 R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381; 167 A…
R v Trezise
[2018] ACTSC 135

…R v Pretorius (No 2) [2016] ACTSC 358 R v Stone [2016] ACTSC 231 R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 R v Toumo’ua [2017] ACTCA 9; 12 ACTLR 103 R v Trezise [2018] ACTSC 135 R v TW [2011] ACTCA 25; 6 ACTLR 18 R v White [2016] ACTSC 237 R v Williams [2019] ACTSC 298 R v Wyper (No 2) [2017] ACTSC 103 R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 115; 1…
Williams v The Queen
[2018] ACTCA 4 Para 1

…In Newby the Court also referred without further elaboration to the decision of Williams v The Queen [2018] ACTCA 4; 83 MVR 505 ( Williams ) where the Court of Appeal observed at [53], [56]-[57] that:…
R v Simonetti
[2018] ACTSC 31 Para 1

…5; R v Barber [2021] ACTSC 78; R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272; R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 and R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 ( Phoumthipphavong ). Counsel for the offender correctly submitted that these ca…
Wyper v The Queen; R v Wyper
[2017] ACTCA 59

…The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Williams v The Queen [2018] ACTCA 4; 83 MVR 505 Wong v The Queen [2001] HCA 64; 207 CLR 584 Wyper v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 59 Zdravkovic v Queen [2016] ACTCA 53…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym)
[2017] HCA 41 Para 1

…o note s 33(1)(za) of the Sentencing Act . I further note that, as the High Court stated in Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; 262 CLR 428 at [4]:…
CX v The Queen
[2017] ACTCA 37 Para 1

…At this juncture it is relevant to refer to the sentencing principles discussed in CX v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 37 where the Court stated at [39].…
R v Wyper (No 2)
[2017] ACTSC 103

…TLR 103 R v Trezise [2018] ACTSC 135 R v TW [2011] ACTCA 25; 6 ACTLR 18 R v White [2016] ACTSC 237 R v Williams [2019] ACTSC 298 R v Wyper (No 2) [2017] ACTSC 103 R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 115; 195 A Crim R 38 Taylor v the Queen [2014] ACTCA 9 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Williams v The Queen [2018] ACTCA…
R v Sutton
[2017] ACTSC 95 Para 1

…8; R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272; R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 ( Mitchener ); R v Walker [2019] ACTSC 172; R v Simonetti [2018] ACTSC 31; R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 and R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 ( Phoumthipphavong ). Counsel for the offender correctly submitted that these cases were generally not compa…
R v Toumo'ua
[2017] ACTCA 9 Para 1

…a sentencing judge to confine themselves to identifying features of the case that inform the objective seriousness of that case”: R v Toumo’ua [2017] ACTCA 9; 12 ACTLR 103 ( Toumo’ua ) at [24]. I accept the features identified by both the prosecution and the offender as set out above and take them into account i…
R v Kilic
[2016] HCA 48 Para 1

…dgment that is reached about the appropriate sentence to be imposed”: Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; 244 CLR 120 at [29]; see also R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 at [19]. The relevant facts, matters and circumstances concerning all offences have been discussed above.…
GS v R
[2016] NSWCCA 266 Para 1

…The Court went on to refer to GS v The Queen [2016] NSWCCA 266 where Gleeson JA (Fagan and N Adams JJ agreeing) stated at [94]:…
R v Pretorius (No 2)
[2016] ACTSC 358

…re (No 3) [2016] ACTSC 299 R v Payne [2015] ACTSC 345 R v Pham [2015] HCA 39; 256 CLR 550 R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 R v Pretorius (No 2) [2016] ACTSC 358 R v Stone [2016] ACTSC 231 R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 R v Toumo’ua [2017] ACTCA 9; 12 ACTLR 103 R v Trezise [2018] ACTSC 135 R v TW [2011] ACTCA 25; 6…
R v Goboly
[2016] ACTSC 322

…v DB [2015] ACTSC 28 R v DK [2016] ACTCA 7 R v DU (No 4) [2020] ACTSC 174 R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 215 R v Goboly [2016] ACTSC 322 R v Horton-Hegarty [2018] ACTCA 22 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Kelly [2014] ACTSC 117 R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 259 CLR 256 R v KS [2018] ACTSC 2…
Zdravkovic v The Queen
[2016] ACTCA 53 Para 1

…must fix an appropriate sentence for each offence and then consider questions of accumulation or concurrence, as well as totality: Zdravkovic v Queen [2016] ACTCA 53 at [64]. In doing so, I must ensure that the aggregation of the sentences appropriate for each offence is a just and appropriate measure of the total…
R v Ngerengere (No 3)
[2016] ACTSC 299 Para 1

…Counsel for the offender referred me to comments of Refshauge J in R v Ngerengere (No 3) [2016] ACTSC 299 where his Honour discussed ICO’s in detail at [17]-[24]. Counsel also referred me to comments made by Refshauge J in Wyper (No 2) at [7]-[8] where his Honour discussed how serving a sentence by way of an ICO wa…
R v White
[2016] ACTSC 237 Para 1

…In relation to the child exploitation material offence, counsel for the offender referred me to four comparable cases: R v White [2016] ACTSC 237; R v Kelly [2014] ACTSC 117 ( Kelly ); R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 and R v DB [2015] ACTSC 28. All four cases concerned a greater number of files/images. In three of the…
Barrett v The Queen
[2016] ACTCA 38 Para 1

…figure falls within the “usual” range adopted in this jurisdiction of 50-70%: Zdravkovic v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 53 at [74]; Barrett v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 38 at [52]; Taylor v the Queen [2014] ACTCA 9 at [20].…
R v Stone
[2016] ACTSC 231

…R v Payne [2015] ACTSC 345 R v Pham [2015] HCA 39; 256 CLR 550 R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 R v Pretorius (No 2) [2016] ACTSC 358 R v Stone [2016] ACTSC 231 R v Sutton [2017] ACTSC 95 R v Toumo’ua [2017] ACTCA 9; 12 ACTLR 103 R v Trezise [2018] ACTSC 135 R v TW [2011] ACTCA 25; 6 ACTLR 18 R v White [2016] A…
Wright v R
[2016] NSWCCA 122 Para 95

…red at length in Holyoak v R (1995) 82 A Crim R 502 at 507 – 508, again in R v DB [2001] NSWCCA 320 at [17], [18] and more recently in Wright v R [2016] NSWCCA 122 at [95] – [97] ……
Millard v The Queen
[2016] ACTCA 14 Para 1

…As the Court of Appeal noted in Henry v The Queen [2019] ACTCA 5 at [36]-[37], citing with approval Millard v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 14; R v Bernath (1997) 1 VR 271 and Toumo’ua , the appropriate non-parole period is not decided by some mathematical relationship. Rather, a Court must consider a range of factors in…
Jurj v The Queen
[2016] VSCA 57 Para 1

…Sexual offences of this nature cover a wide spectrum of criminal culpability. In Jurj v The Queen [2016] VSCA 57 at [80] the Court identified various features as relevant generally to the assessment of objective seriousness, stating:…
R v DK
[2016] ACTCA 7

…rim R 1 R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121; 106 A Crim R 303 R v Clinch (1994) 72 A Crim R 301 R v Davison [2020] ACTSC 272 R v DB [2015] ACTSC 28 R v DK [2016] ACTCA 7 R v DU (No 4) [2020] ACTSC 174 R v Francis [2021] ACTSC 212 R v Garay (No 3) [2021] ACTSC 215 R v Goboly [2016] ACTSC 322 R v Horton-Hegarty [2018] ACT…
R v Pham
[2015] HCA 39 Para 1

…Bare sentencing statistics provide limited assistance: R v Pham [2015] HCA 39; 256 CLR 550. Statistics do not provide information about why sentences were fixed as they were in each case: Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 ( Hili ). There are a number of decisions of this Court relating to offenders who…
R v Payne
[2015] ACTSC 345

…019] ACTSC 251 R v McCall [2022] NSWDC 78 R v Mitchener [2019] ACTSC 351 R v Newby [2022] ACTCA 20 R v Ngerengere (No 3) [2016] ACTSC 299 R v Payne [2015] ACTSC 345 R v Pham [2015] HCA 39; 256 CLR 550 R v Phoumthipphavong [2021] ACTSC 97 R v Pretorius (No 2) [2016] ACTSC 358 R v Stone [2016] ACTSC 231 R v Sutton [2…

Legislation cited in this decision · 5

Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT)
10, 11, 33, 34A, 6, 7, 78 8 mentions (from Para 1)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
55, 65, 92E, 92K 5 mentions
Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT)
68B 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention
Magistrates Court Act 1930 (ACT)
1 mention (from Para 1)