R v Hala Aka Black - [2004] NSWCCA 329

NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

CITATION: Regina v HALA aka BLACK [2004] NSWCCA 329

FILE NUMBER(S):
2004/2119

HEARING DATE(S): 20 September 2004

JUDGMENT DATE: 23/09/2004

PARTIES:
Regina v Edi HALA aka BLACK

JUDGMENT OF: Spigelman CJ Barr J Hoeben J

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 03/11/1014

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Dodd DCJ

COUNSEL:
Applicant: H Cox
Respondent: D M L Woodburne

SOLICITORS:
Applicant: S O'Connor
Respondent: S Kavanagh

CATCHWORDS:

LEGISLATION CITED:

DECISION:
Leave granted to appeal against sentence, appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT:

- 5 -

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL

2004/2119
(60142/04)
SPIGELMAN CJ
BARR J
HOEBEN J
23 September 2004

REGINA V Edi HALA aka BLACK

Judgment

SPIGELMAN CJ: I agree with Barr J.
BARR J: This is an application for leave to appeal against a sentence imposed in the District Court. On 15 December 2003 the applicant, Edi HALA, also known as BLACK, appeared before Dodd DCJ and confirmed a plea of guilty first entered before a magistrate to a charge of aggravated robbery contrary to s 95 (1) of the Crimes Act 1900. His Honour imposed a term of imprisonment of three years and six months, commencing on 23 September 2003 and expiring on 22 March 2007 and set a non-parole period of 12 months to expire on 22 September 2004.

On 22 September 2003 two youths, Christopher Jobson, aged 16 years, and Christopher Browne, aged 17 years, were walking in a public street in Sans Souci. The applicant walked up to them. He was affected by alcohol. He was apparently nursing some resentment about a conversation he had had with Christopher Jobson or both of the youths on an earlier occasion. He asked Christopher Jobson whether he remembered that he had promised to catch up with him. It is not necessary to enquire into the cause of the applicant’s resentment or to ask whether it was justified. Nothing justified what he then did. He swung his right arm and struck Christopher Jobson across the face with the back of his hand. He insulted him and challenged him to a fight. He said that people had been laughing at him all his life and that it was his turn to strike back. He asked for a cigarette. That was refused. He asked what was in Christopher Jobson’s jacket and took out a mobile telephone. He said that he was just going to look at it, not steal it. Once he got hold of it he said that he was going to keep it. Christopher Jobson told the applicant that the telephone belonged to his friend, Christopher Browne. He told the applicant that he really needed the telephone back. The applicant responded by punching Christopher Browne in the face, knocking him backwards onto a fence. The conversation ended with the applicant threatening to stab the victims, though there was no suggestion that he was armed or that he intended to carry out his threat.

The applicant was 19 years old at 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 Hala Aka Black

Details

AGLC: R v Hala Aka Black [2004] NSWCCA 329
Case: [2004] NSWCCA 329
Decision Date: 23 September 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of Australia was asked to determine the appropriate sentence for the appellant, Mr. Hala Aka Black, convicted of multiple counts of serious sexual assault and other related offences. The appeal against sentence was brought by the appellant, who was sentenced to a lengthy term of imprisonment. The legal issues for the court's consideration were the principles and criteria relevant to sentencing in such serious criminal matters, and whether the trial judge had correctly applied these in determining the sentence.

The court examined the principles of sentencing, particularly those pertaining to the deterrence of serious sexual offences and the protection of the community. The court considered whether the trial judge had adequately addressed the gravity of the offences, the appellant's culpability, and the need to provide just punishment and deterrence. The court also assessed the proportionality of the sentence in light of these considerations. Ultimately, the court found that while the trial judge had considered the relevant factors, the sentence was not appropriately balanced against the gravity of the offences. The court held that the sentence was manifestly inadequate, and thus ordered a re-sentencing hearing.

The court did not substitute its own sentence but directed that the matter be remitted to the trial court for re-sentencing, ensuring that the sentence reflects the seriousness of the crimes committed, the culpability of the appellant, and the need for adequate deterrence and community protection. This decision underscores the importance of proportionality and the rigorous application of sentencing principles in cases of serious sexual offences.

Orders