R v Hermansson, Brock Dean - [2018] NSWDC 95

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v HERMANSSON, Brock Dean [2018] NSWDC 95
Hearing dates: 24 November 2017 and 21 February 2018
Date of orders: 23 February 2018
Decision date: 23 February 2018
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:
Full time custodial sentence. Full details at [87].

Catchwords: Criminal – sentence – pleas of guilty – supply prohibited drug – MDMA – possession of a prohibited weapon – taser – two matters on a Form 1 – pre-sentence custody – quasi-custody at Odyssey House – 28 years old – no prior criminal history – started using illicit drugs at 18 years old – positive reports on continuing drug rehabilitation and insight and remorse for offending – no mental health condition present at the time of offending – full discount for early plea of guilty – delay – special circumstances
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Weapon Prohibition Act 1998 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Attorney General's Application No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147
Blackman and Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Hammoud
Kovacevic (2000) 111 A Crim R 131
Parente v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 284
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610
R v Palu [2002] NSWCCA 381
Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205
The Queen v Sullivan [2004] NSWCCA 99
Truss v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 325
Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Brock Dean Hermansson
Representation: Representatives:
Ms. Turner – Director of Public Prosecutions
Ms. Evans – Offender

File Number(s): 2016/00235881

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR: In this particular matter the prisoner appears for sentence in relation to an offence of supplying a prohibited drug, to wit MDMA, on 25 August 2016, and also possessing a prohibited weapon without a permit, to wit, a Taser, on the same date.
The offence of supplying a prohibited drug carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment and/or a pecuniary penalty of 2,000 penalty units. There is no standard non-parole period.
The possess prohibited weapon without permit, that is the possession of the Taser, involves consideration of s 7(1) Weapon Prohibition Act 1998, which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment, with a standard non-parole period of five years.
The prisoner was in custody from the time of his arrest on 25 August 2016 till released on bail, as I understand it on 3 November 2016. That is a total of 71 days, which is two months and ten days.
Furthermore, the prisoner has been since late 2016 undertaking a course of rehabilitation at the Odyssey House premises near Campbelltown, about which there have been a number of reports prepared, and I will come back to that material.
It is agreed, as I understand it from the submissions that were made last time the matter was before me, which was only a few days ago, that up until 21 February 2018, the offender had 436 days of…

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 Hermansson, Brock Dean

Details

AGLC: R v Hermansson, Brock Dean [2018] NSWDC 95
Case: [2018] NSWDC 95
Decision Date: 23 February 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Brock Dean Hermansson, was charged with two separate offences. The first was supplying a prohibited drug, specifically MDMA, and the second was possessing a prohibited weapon, namely a taser. Both matters were dealt with under a Form 1 in the Supreme Court of Queensland. Hermansson, 28 years old with no prior criminal history, had begun using illicit drugs at the age of 18. Despite his previous lack of criminal activity, Hermansson pled guilty to both charges. The court acknowledged his early guilty pleas and the positive developments in his life, including his participation in drug rehabilitation programs and his demonstrated insight and remorse.

The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate sentencing for Hermansson’s offences, considering his background, the nature of the crimes, and the mitigating factors. The court needed to balance the seriousness of the offences against the mitigating circumstances, including Hermansson’s early guilty pleas, his ongoing efforts in rehabilitation, and the absence of a mental health condition at the time of offending. The court also had to consider the impact of pre-sentence custody and quasi-custody at Odyssey House on Hermansson’s rehabilitation efforts.

The court determined that a full-time custodial sentence was warranted, reflecting the seriousness of Hermansson’s offences. Despite the mitigating factors, the court emphasised the need for general deterrence and the protection of the community. The court applied a full discount for Hermansson’s early guilty pleas and considered the special circumstances of his background and ongoing rehabilitation efforts. Ultimately, the court imposed a sentence that balanced punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation, with full details of the sentence provided in paragraph [87].

The court concluded that the appropriate sentence was a full-time custodial term. The specific details of the sentence, including the length and conditions, were outlined in paragraph [87] of the judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full time custodial sentence. Full details at [87].

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 HERMANSSON, Brock Dean [2018] NSWDC 95
Hearing dates:	24 November 2017 and 21 February 2018
Date of orders:	23 February 2018
Decision date:	23 February 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Full time custodial sentence. Full details at [87].
Catchwords:	Criminal – sentence – pleas of guilty – supply prohibited drug – MDMA – possession of a prohibited weapon – taser – two matters on a Form 1 – pre-sentence custody – quasi-custody at Odyssey House – 28 years old – no prior criminal history – started using illicit drugs at 18 years old – positive reports on continuing drug rehabilitation and insight and remorse for offending – no mental health condition present at the time of offending – full discount for early plea of guilty – delay – special circumstances
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Weapon Prohibition Act 1998 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Attorney General's Application No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147 Blackman and Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Hammoud Kovacevic (2000) 111 A Crim R 131 Parente v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 284 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610 R v Palu [2002] NSWCCA 381 Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205 The Queen v Sullivan [2004] NSWCCA 99 Truss v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 325 Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Brock Dean Hermansson
Representation:	Representatives: Ms. Turner – Director of Public Prosecutions Ms. Evans – Offender
File Number(s):	2016/00235881