R v Gotte

[2018] ACTSC 219

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Gotte

Citation:

[2018] ACTSC 219

Hearing Date:

18 May 2018

DecisionDate:

15 August 2018

Before:

Elkaim J

Decision:

See [33]

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – attempted aggravated robbery – minor theft

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) s 29(1)(b)

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) ss 44, 310 and 321

Cases Cited:

R v Billington [2014] ACTSC 350

R v Twerd [2018] ACTSC 153

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

Jacob Gotte (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel

Ms R Khazma (Crown)

Mr D Hoitink (Offender)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

Legal Aid ACT (Offender)

File Numbers:

SCC 312 of 2017; SCC 313 of 2017

ELKAIM J:

1. On 9 November 2017, the offender pleaded guilty to two offences:

(a)Attempted aggravated robbery, contrary to s 310 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) by virtue of s 44 of Criminal Code 2002 (ACT); and

(b)Minor theft, contrary to s 321 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT).

1. The maximum penalty for the offence of aggravated robbery is 25 years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of $375,000. The maximum penalty for the offence of theft is six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine of $7,500.

1. I observe at the outset that the length of the maximum term of imprisonment for the robbery offence is an indication of the seriousness with which the community regards offences of this type.

1. In addition I have had regard to cases like R v Twerd [2018] ACTSC 153 and R v Billington [2014] ACTSC 350 as indicating the very stern attitude that must be taken to these offences. Of course each case is to be decided on its own facts. Nevertheless, the above cases provide useful guidance.

1. The pleas of guilty were not entered at the earliest opportunity but, nevertheless, have significant utilitarian value, particularly in relation to the robbery charge. The offender is entitled to a discount arising from the plea, which I assess at 20%.

1. The offender was born in 1985. He is now 32 years of age. He was raised in Canberra and is the eldest of four children. He did not have a particularly close relationship with his parents. They divorced when he was eight years old. He was cared for by his mother until the age of 16.

1. The offender completed Year 12. He suffers from dyslexia. He does not have a good employment history, probably due to his mental health issues. He is in a de facto relationship which is apparently supportive. Unfortunately, a number of the relationships he has been involved in have not been successful. He was married at a young age and soon became heavily involved with drugs and alcohol.

1. There are two children of the relationship which ended unhappily after eight years. These two children are now cared for by the offender. One of them has significant behavioural problems which require a good deal of extra care. The imprisonment of the offender would…