R v Greg Merritt - [2019] NSWDC 713

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Greg Merritt [2019] NSWDC 713
Hearing dates: 18 December 2019
Decision date: 18 December 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence of five years 3 months with a non parole period of three years.

Catchwords: SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence -multiple offences - victim vindication – retribution - young offender - history of profound disadvantage – never had the opportunity to live a normal community life - finding of special circumstances.
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Administration of Sentencing) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 249 CLR 571
Henry v R (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
Legge v R [2004] NSWCCA 244
R v Herring (1956) 73 WN (NSW) 203
Category: Sentence
Parties: Greg Merritt (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr R Steward (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (for the offender)
Ms A Bird (for Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2018/00390882

SENTENCE – ex tempore revised

Greg Merritt was born in May 1998. He is an Aboriginal Australian who although still young has spent most of his life in gaol and juvenile institutions. The material before me indicates that he has never really lived a normal community life. When he was released from gaol in September 2018, he was not ready to lead a normal community life. That is evidenced by the facts that are presently before the Court.
It is important to note that CCTV did not prevent these crimes. The almost inevitability of the offender’s DNA being left and discovered did not prevent these crimes. The heavy sentences imposed by courts for armed robbery offences did not prevent these crimes and with great respect the guideline judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal and its implementation since 1998 did not prevent these crimes.
On 10 December 2018, he, together with his co-offender (a woman who is to be sentenced in 2020), came into possession of registration plates taken from a blue Toyota Camry in Albion Park. Not long after in Albion Park Rail, a blue Toyota Orion was stolen. Soon after, Merritt was observed on CCTV in that car at a Shell service station. The following day a series of crimes were committed.
At about 9.40, on 11 December 2018 a young university student arrived at Wollongong University to take an exam. He parked his VW Golf close to the university. As he left the car, he saw the previously stolen blue Toyota Orion parked a short distance from him. It was being driven by the co-offender Merritt got out of the Orion and ran towards the student. He hurdled a road safety barrier and stopped in front of the student.
He pulled out a Taser and used it on his victim to the lower abdomen saying, “Give me your keys brother”. His victim handed over the keys. Merritt then demanded his wallet. His victim replied he did not have it with him. Merritt…

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 Greg Merritt

Details

AGLC: R v Greg Merritt [2019] NSWDC 713
Case: [2019] NSWDC 713
Decision Date: 18 December 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Regina v Greg Merritt, the Court of Appeal was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for Merritt, who had pleaded guilty to various serious criminal offences. The primary legal issues before the court were the determination of an aggregate sentence for Merritt's multiple offences, and the consideration of factors relevant to sentencing, including the need for victim vindication, the principles of retribution, and the unique personal circumstances of the offender.

The court considered the nature and circumstances of the offences, which involved serious criminal conduct that warranted a substantial punishment. However, it was also mindful of the need to consider Merritt's personal history, which was marked by profound disadvantage and a lack of opportunity to live a normal life within the community. The court found that Merritt's background constituted special circumstances that warranted a degree of leniency in the sentencing process. After weighing these factors, the court determined that an aggregate sentence of five years and three months, with a non-parole period of three years, was appropriate.

The court emphasised the importance of balancing the need for punishment and deterrence with the principles of rehabilitation and the opportunity for the offender to reintegrate into society. In light of Merritt's unique circumstances, the court concluded that a sentence of this length would provide sufficient punishment while also offering the possibility of rehabilitation and reintegration. The final orders of the court were that Merritt be sentenced to an aggregate term of five years and three months, with a non-parole period of three years.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of five years 3 months with a non parole period of three 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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Greg Merritt [2019] NSWDC 713
Hearing dates:	18 December 2019
Decision date:	18 December 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence of five years 3 months with a non parole period of three years.
Catchwords:	SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence -multiple offences - victim vindication – retribution - young offender - history of profound disadvantage – never had the opportunity to live a normal community life - finding of special circumstances.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Administration of Sentencing) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 249 CLR 571 Henry v R (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Legge v R [2004] NSWCCA 244 R v Herring (1956) 73 WN (NSW) 203
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Greg Merritt (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr R Steward (for the offender) Solicitors: Legal Aid NSW (for the offender) Ms A Bird (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2018/00390882