R v Goodge
[2019] ACTSC 297
•13 December 2019
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Goodge |
Citation: | [2019] ACTSC 297 |
Hearing Dates: | 16 October and 13 December 2019 |
DecisionDates: | 18 October and 13 December 2019 |
Before: | Mossop J |
Decision: | See [50] and [52] |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and punishment – sentence – aggravated robbery – making a demand with a threat to endanger health, safety or physical wellbeing – intensive correction order – where restorative justice is appropriate |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 32(2) Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), s 78 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), s 310 |
Cases Cited: | Azzopardi v The Queen [2011] VSCA 372; 35 VR 43 R v XXL [2019] ACTSC 294 |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Sunnrai Goodge (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel D Sahu Khan (Crown) J Moffett (Offender) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) McKenna Taylor (Offender) | |
File Number: | SCC 11 of 2019 |
MOSSOP J:
Reasons given on 16 October 2019
The offender, Sunnrai Goodge, has pleaded guilty to two offences:
(a)one count of aggravated robbery contrary to s 310 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), committed on 2 July 2018, the maximum penalty for which is 25 years’ imprisonment, a fine of 2500 penalty units or both (CC2018/10561); and
(b)one count of making a demand with a threat to endanger the health, safety or physical wellbeing of a person contrary to s 32(2)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), committed on 12 July 2018, the maximum penalty for which is 10 years’ imprisonment (CC2018/10518).
His co-offender in relation to the first offence is XXL who is being dealt with at the same time: see R v XXL [2019] ACTSC 294.
Facts
The facts in relation to Mr Goodge’s offending were agreed and are, in summary, as follows.
In January 2018, the victim, [ML], entered into an agreement with Mr Goodge who was known to him as ‘Sunni’. The agreement was for a loan of $2300 with which the victim was to purchase a vehicle.
The victim sold the vehicle and obtained a bank loan for $13,000 to purchase a white Audi S3 sedan. The victim continued to repay Mr Goodge for the debt and as at July 2018 he had an outstanding debt of approximately $1500. The victim was working as a cleaner and was in the process of saving money to pay off the remainder of the debt.
At some time in June 2018, Mr Goodge heard that the victim was working and had purchased a new motor vehicle even though he still owed him money.
On 1 July 2018, Mr Goodge contacted the victim on Facebook Messenger using his personal profile '[redacted]'. Mr Goodge sent the following message to the victim:
I've added it all up & doubled it just for the FUCKING STOOGE JEW. Yeh that’s you ( through&through. A if you think you are going to just pay me 900. I WILL COME THERERIGHT NOW YOUSHIT TALKING STUPID FUCKING COCK HEAD & I’LL PUT YOU TO BED
The Agreed Statement of Facts does not provide any explanation for the level of vitriol and threat in this communication.
The same night, the victim received text messages via Facebook Messenger from XXL whom he had known for five or six years. XXL was using his Facebook profile in the name of ‘[redacted]’. ln these messages XXL alleged that the victim was making inappropriate contact with XXL’s girlfriend. The victim responded and denied that he had made such contact as she was not his type and he would never do that to a mate.
At about 2.30am on 2 July 2018, the victim was asleep in his bedroom located in a granny flat at the back of his parents’ house in Wanniassa. At around this time, he heard a knock on the door to his granny flat. He heard the voice of Mr Goodge and opened the door, XXL then pushed past Mr Goodge and forced entry into the granny flat, while yelling and screaming at the victim. Mr Goodge then entered the flat.
The victim saw that XXL was holding a small wooden bat in his right hand and a small purple folding knife in his left hand. The knife was approximately 15cm long. The bat was approximately 30cm long and was the diameter of a tennis ball.
XXL began to wave his knife in the victim’s face before striking him on the left side of his head a number of times using the wooden bat.
XXL demanded the victim sign over ownership of his Audi vehicle to Mr Goodge whilst threatening him with the knife.
The victim wrote a note stating that he signed over ownership of his Audi vehicle to Mr Goodge. He only did so because XXL had assaulted him with the bat earlier and was fearful he would use the knife to cause him further injury.
Mr Goodge was present at all times when XXL was carrying out the assault.
Mr Goodge and XXL knocked over several items in the victim's granny flat before taking his wallet, Samsung S7 mobile phone, a taser, a “$” shaped money box and keys to his vehicle.
The victim left his granny flat and saw that his motor vehicle had been taken. He then entered the main residence and alerted his mother to what had happened. She knew Mr Goodge as a friend of the victim. She then contacted police at about 3.05am who attended a short time later. Members from ACT Ambulance Service attended at about 3.35am and transported the victim to the Canberra Hospital.
At about 2.25pm on 4 July 2018, police located the victim’s vehicle next to a unit in Summerland Circuit in Kambah. Police seized the vehicle and took it back to the Australian Federal Police Exhibit Management Centre where it was forensically examined.
Although there was some suggestion in the Agreed Statement of Facts that the vehicle may have been taken merely as security for the repayment of the debt by the victim to Mr Goodge, the parties agreed that Mr Goodge and XXL should be sentenced on the basis that their intention was to permanently deprive the victim of the vehicle and hence that the elements of theft and hence robbery were satisfied in relation to the vehicle as well as the other items taken. Those facts give rise to the charges of aggravated robbery in relation to Mr Goodge and XXL (CC2018/10561 and CC2018/14718).
On 12 July 2018, the victim received messages on Facebook Messenger from ‘[redacted]’ that is, Mr Goodge. The messages made reference to the victim ignoring the Mr Goodge’s requests to pay back the money owed to him. Mr Goodge told the victim that if he did not make contact he would “work out on you Round two, three, four, five, & so on etc. Until you get the message”. The victim believed that Mr Goodge was making threats that if he did not attend his residence and pay back the money owed, Mr Goodge would attend again and assault him further. This gives rise to the offence of making a demand with a threat to endanger the health, safety or physical well-being of a person (CC2018/10518).
On 24 July 2018, police executed a search warrant at Mr Goodge’s residence. At the residence, police located a brown crocodile wallet, a “$” shaped money box and a Samsung S7 mobile phone as described by the victim as items taken from his residence by Mr Goodge and XXL on 2 July 2018.
During the execution of the search warrant, police officers recorded what occurred. During the recording Mr Goodge made a number of admissions in relation to attending the victim’s residence with XXL and taking a number of items from the residence.
Both XXL and Mr Goodge’s fingerprints were found on the Audi sedan.
Victim impact statements
Two victim impact statements were prepared by the victim. The first demonstrates that he feared for his life when he was being attacked. It also explains the impact that he perceived the attack had on him and his mother. It indicates that the robbery had a significant psychological effect upon him and he became in his words “unemployable in that mind state”. It identifies that he has recovered somewhat from the impact of the robbery. His second statement describes his reaction to the robbery in further detail, the fact that it led him to sink into a depressive state and the impact upon his relationships with his then partner and mother.
The victim impact statement prepared by his mother describes the impact of her son seeking help in the early hours of the morning in an injured state. It describes the stress and anxiety that she has suffered since and, in particular, her fears that the robbers would return.
It describes the impact upon her and the victim and the effect on her relationship with her husband and her two sons. It describes the ongoing traumatic memories that she suffers as a result of the incident on that night.
I have taken into account the terms of the victim impact statements particularly insofar as they articulate the terror inflicted upon the victim at the time and the subsequent psychological impact upon him and his family.
Objective seriousness
The robbery was statutorily aggravated because Mr Goodge was in company with XXL. It was also aggravated by the fact that weapons were involved. It involved a robbery committed at the home of the victim in the early hours of the morning. Although Mr Goodge was not the one who inflicted the violence upon the victim he was present throughout and made possible the access to the victim’s residence. I consider his culpability to be somewhat less than XXL’s. I consider that the objective seriousness of this offence is somewhat below the mid range of objective seriousness for the offence of aggravated robbery.
In assessing the gravity of the offence of making a demand with a threat, regard must be had to the nature of the demand, the manner and circumstances in which it is made and the nature of the threat to endanger the other person’s health, safety or physical well‑being. In this case the demand was not made in person. While that avoided the element of a personal confrontation, it was nevertheless a very significant one given that it came in the context of the aggravated robbery that occurred shortly before. While the nature of the threatened harm was non-specific, having regard to what had occurred previously it was a grave threat. Having regard to the fact that offences against s 32(2) extend to circumstances involving resisting lawful apprehension or detention of persons (s 32(2) (b)) and lawful investigations by a police officer (s 32(2)(c)) the offence was below the mid range of objective seriousness for a contravention of s 32(2).
Subjective circumstances
Mr Goodge is 32 years old. He reported a difficult childhood with his parents separating and suffering abuse from his alcoholic stepfather. He resides with his mother with whom he maintains a close relationship. He is single and has no children. He intends to continue residing with his mother.
He completed Year 10 at school and then subsequently unsuccessfully attempted to complete his Year 12 certificate as a mature age student in 2016. He has been unemployed for the past four or five years. He previously attempted to run a fruit juice company that travelled to shows and exhibitions. That business failed. He has had no other significant employment as an adult.
He was injured in a workplace incident where he suffered significant burns and received compensation for that in 2013. That money has been spent on drugs, family and attempts to set up a small business.
He has no savings. He does not receive government benefits. His mother assists him with some money.
He is socially isolated. He has some acquaintances that his mother does not approve of as they use illicit substances or are otherwise involved in the criminal justice system. He does have some prosocial friends although has not spent time with them for a number of years now. He commenced using alcohol and cannabis as a child but does not presently have any problematic use of those drugs. He first used methamphetamine at the age of 29. He resumed using the drug more regularly approximately a year later, smoking the substance daily for approximately six months. He lost his driver’s licence in 2018 and returned to using the substance frequently. Although in August 2019 he denied using illicit substances, a urine test on 13 June 2019 proved positive for amphetamine and methamphetamine. He claimed that this was as a result of passive smoking when he was spending time with friends.
Although he claimed to spend time looking for work his mother reported that she suspects his mental health issues are preventing him from actively seeking work or engaging positively with the community. She believes that he has suffered from severe depression and anxiety for a number of years.
Mr Goodge minimised his own behaviour, attributing most of the blame to his co-offender XXL. He said that he had made a decision with XXL to visit the victim and attempt to coerce him to pay the money owed. He said that he was under the influence of methamphetamine at the time of the offences and his judgment was clouded. He said that the incident escalated upon arrival of the victim’s home although he had only originally intended to speak with the victim. He attributed the violent escalation of the actions to his co-offender.
He said that he immediately regretted what happened. That is obviously inconsistent with his subsequent conduct on 12 July 2019. However, he did say that he would have apologised to the victim if his bail order had permitted it and was willing to participate in restorative justice.
He is assessed as suitable for community service work.
A letter from the offender’s mother was also tendered. The picture painted of the offender is that of a somewhat isolated person who his mother describes as a “peaceful homebody”.
Criminal history
His criminal history is limited. In 2017 he committed the offence of driving with a prescribed drug in his oral fluid. The drug was methamphetamine. He was fined and disqualified from driving for a period. He committed the same offence a year and half later at the end of 2018 and was fined and disqualified once again.
Plea of guilty
He entered pleas of guilty after the charges had been committed to the Supreme Court following a criminal case conference. Pleas of guilty have significant utilitarian value. I will allow a reduction of approximately 15% on account of those pleas.
Time in custody
The offender has not spent any time in custody in relation to the offences.
Consideration
His involvement is somewhat less than XXL’s. The agreed facts do not provide a full explanation as to how the incident got so out of control. It is likely to have been contributed to by the use of methamphetamine. Mr Goodge’s conduct before and after the aggravated robbery demonstrates a significant amount of largely unexplained hostility to the victim who was previously his friend.
It is significant that Mr Goodge has a very limited criminal history and that the criminal history that he does have is associated with methamphetamine use.
The fact that he was 31 years old at the time of the offending puts him in a different category to his co-offender in that the foolishness of youth is less of an explanation for his conduct and the particular considerations in Azzopardi v The Queen [2011] VSCA 372; 35 VR 43 at [34]-[36] are not applicable.
It is clear that addressing his drug use, lack of employment and possible depression would reduce what the author of the pre-sentence report identified as a medium risk of reoffending.
Having regard to the gravity of the aggravated robbery offence I consider that only a custodial sentence is appropriate. In my view, the appropriate starting point is a sentence of imprisonment of 22 months. It is reduced to 19 months on account of the plea of guilty. In relation to the making of the demand with threats, the appropriate starting point is a sentence of imprisonment of six months reduced to five months on account of the plea of guilty. This will be cumulative as to one month on the previous sentence but otherwise concurrent. This gives an aggregate sentence of 20 months’ imprisonment.
Given that the offender has over the last two years been frequently using methamphetamine and that his offending is associated with the use of methamphetamine, it is appropriate to consider, when determining how his sentence of imprisonment should be served, the outcome of an intensive correction assessment. Once that is prepared I will be in a better position to make a decision about how the sentence should be served.
I intend to make a referral for restorative justice if the offender consents to me doing so. I make it clear, however, that I do not propose to delay the finalisation of the sentencing until any restorative justice process is complete. Rather, I will attempt to finalise the matter as soon as possible after the intensive correction assessment is carried out. [Following an explanation the offender consented to a referral for restorative justice].
Orders
The orders of the Court are:
1. An intensive correction assessment under s 78 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) is to be prepared in relation to each offence.
2. The matter is listed for hearing at 9.15am on Friday, 13 December 2019.
3. A referral to restorative justice in relation to both offences is made.
4. Bail is varied adding a condition that Mr Goodge abide by any directions of an officer of ACT Corrective Services regarding the preparation of an intensive correction assessment.
Reasons given on 13 December 2019
The position in relation to Mr Goodge is that his offending behaviour was contributed to by the use of methamphetamine. He is somebody who has the benefit of family support. He has had a substantial period of unemployment. He's been assessed as suitable for an ICO. The restorative justice report indicates that that is a work in progress. It is not a matter which I consider should delay the finalisation of the proceedings. I consider that the sentence of imprisonment should be served by way of intensive correction and the orders that I make are as follows.
The orders of the Court are:
1.On the charge of aggravated robbery (CC2018/10561) the offender is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 18 months starting on 13 December 2019 and ending on 12 June 2021.
2.On the charge of making demands with threat (CC2018/10518) the offender is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for five months starting on 13 February 2021 and ending on 12 July 2021.
3.Each sentence is to be served by way of intensive correction with the following conditions:
(i)That the offender undertake medical treatment and supervision as directed by a corrections officer.
(ii)That the offender supply samples of blood, breath, hair, saliva or urine for alcohol or drug testing as required by a corrections officer.
(iii)That the offender attend such educational, vocational, psychological, psychiatric or other programs or counselling as directed by a corrections officer.
| I certify that the preceding fifty-two [52] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Mossop. Associate: Date: 23 January 2020 |
8
2
3