R v Henry

Case [2021] NSWDC 152


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Henry [2021] NSWDC 152
Hearing dates: 12 February 2021
Date of orders: 12 February 2021
Decision date: 12 February 2021
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:

An aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years, 2 months with a non-parole period of 22 months: at [44].

Catchwords:

SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Planned or organised criminal activity — Record of previous convictions

SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty

SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment

SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Establishing relevant matters — Factual basis for sentence — Form 1 offences — General principles — Maximum penalty — Objective seriousness — Purposes of sentencing — Ellis discount

SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Special circumstances — Drug addiction

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:

Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146

Buckley v R [2021] NSWCCA 6

Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144

R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603

R v Qutami (2001) 127 A Crim R 369

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:Sentence
Parties:

Regina (Crown)

Jeffrey Henry (Offender)
Representation:

Ms N Keay (Crown Prosecutor)

Mr G Scragg (Counsel for the Accused)
File Number(s): 2020/62969; 2020/181196
Publication restriction: STATUTORY NON PUBLICATION APPLIES
Section 578A Crimes Act 1900: Any matter that may identify the complainant.

Judgment

  1. Jeffrey Henry is a Canadian national born in 1969. He has pleaded guilty at an early stage to two charges in circumstances justifying a 25% discount for the utilitarian value of the pleas. There is also a matter to be taken into account on the Form 1 which will be dealt with in the way suggested by the Chief Justice in the guideline judgment of the matters (Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146).

  2. The first count to be dealt with is an offence of sexual intercourse without consent contrary to s 61I of the Crimes Act 1900 which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment with a standard non-parole period of seven years. The second count is an offence of intentionally record an intimate image without consent contrary to s 91P(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 which carries a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment, with no standard non-parole period . A second offence contrary to s 91P(1) is to be dealt with on a Form 1 in relation to that second count.

  3. The purposes of sentencing set out in s 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 have to be considered and the maximum penalty and where applicable the standard non-parole period are important yardsticks in the sentencing process.

  4. He has been in custody since his arrest on 19 June 2020. It is common ground that full time custody is required and that it is unnecessary for me…

Continue reading R v Henry

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Henry [2021] NSWDC 152
Case
[2021] NSWDC 152
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Henry, the defendant faced sentencing in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The nature of the dispute was centred on the imposition of a suitable sentence for the defendant, who had pleaded guilty to charges involving drug trafficking and possession with intent to supply. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate term of imprisonment, considering both aggravating and mitigating factors.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the assessment of the aggravating and mitigating factors relevant to the sentencing process. The court considered the nature of the offence, including whether it was part of a planned or organised criminal activity, and the defendant’s criminal history. On the mitigating side, the court recognised the defendant’s plea of guilty and the potential for rehabilitation, including the defendant's drug addiction which was deemed a significant mitigating factor.

The court, in reaching its decision, meticulously weighed the aggravating factors such as the planned nature of the criminal activity and the defendant's prior convictions against the mitigating factors including the plea of guilty and the defendant's addiction. The court applied the principles of sentencing, including the objective seriousness of the offence, the purposes of sentencing, and the Ellis discount for a plea of guilty. Ultimately, the court determined an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years and 2 months, with a non-parole period of 22 months, reflecting a balanced consideration of all relevant factors.

Orders

Orders of the court

An aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years, 2 months with a non-parole period of 22 months: at [44].

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.