R v Hoskins - [2021] NSWDC 327

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hoskins [2021] NSWDC 327
Hearing dates: 20 July 2021
Decision date: 20 July 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years 3 months. Non parole period of 1 year 1 month.

Catchwords:
CRIME – Robbery whilst armed with an offensive weapon- of a service station
MENTAL HEALTH - Criminal proceedings - offender found unfit to be tried offender by District Court - found fit by Mental Health Review Tribunal
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence - guilty plea at first opportunity after offender found fit- mental illness had causative relationship to offence - background of deprivation – sentencing mentally ill offenders - early exposure to drug use and domestic violence - seriousness of offence - guideline judgment - community protection - risk to community - demonstrated progress toward rehabilitation - structure of sentence

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act1999
Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58
Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195; 172 A Crim R 371
DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; (2010) 79 NSWLR 1
Engert v R (1995) 84 A Crim R 67
Kesavarajah v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 230; [1994] HCA 41
Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600: [2013] HCA 38
Porter v R [2008] NSWCCA 145
Presser v R [1958] VR 45
R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255
Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14
Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629; [2003] HCA 14

Category: Sentence
Parties: Nyeasha Rose Hoskins (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr J Hibbard (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Limited (for the offender)
Ms K Stanley (for Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2020/00198906

Judgment

Agreed facts

In July 2020 Nyeasha Hoskins, then aged 20, was living with her parents in Narooma. At about 5.30pm on 5 July 2020 she went to the Caltex Service Station about 250 metres from her home. She was wearing distinctive clothing. She purchased some items from the console operator, who knew her as a regular customer. She used her keycard to pay for the items. She left and returned home.
At about 6.30pm that same evening she returned to the service station. She was wearing the same clothing. She pulled a knife from her pocket and held it towards the console operator. As she did so she said, “Give me the money. Give me the money”. She tried to jump over the counter and its plexiglass screen but failed. She then walked around the counter and said, “Give me the money. Just stand here. Open the till”. She was holding the knife towards the console…

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 Hoskins

Details

AGLC: R v Hoskins [2021] NSWDC 327
Case: [2021] NSWDC 327
Decision Date: 20 July 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Hoskins, was charged with robbery while armed with an offensive weapon, having committed the offence at a service station. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. Hoskins had initially been found unfit to be tried by the District Court due to his mental health issues, but was later found fit by the Mental Health Review Tribunal. Hoskins pleaded guilty to the offence at the first opportunity after being found fit.

The court had to determine the appropriate sentence, taking into account Hoskins' guilty plea at the earliest opportunity, his mental illness and its causative relationship to the offence, his background of deprivation, and his early exposure to drug use and domestic violence. The court also had to consider the seriousness of the offence, the need for community protection, the risk Hoskins posed to the community, and his demonstrated progress towards rehabilitation. The guideline judgment and the structure of the sentence were also factors considered.

The court sentenced Hoskins to a term of imprisonment of two years and three months, with a non-parole period of one year and one month. The court took into account the mitigating factors of Hoskins' guilty plea, his mental illness, and his background of deprivation, but also considered the seriousness of the offence and the need for community protection. The court found that a structured sentence would best address Hoskins' rehabilitation needs and reduce the risk of reoffending.

The court's final orders were that Hoskins be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two years and three months, with a non-parole period of one year and one month. The sentence was structured to address Hoskins' rehabilitation needs and reduce the risk of reoffending, while also providing for community protection.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years 3 months. Non parole period of 1 year 1 month.

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 Hoskins [2021] NSWDC 327
Hearing dates:	20 July 2021
Decision date:	20 July 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years 3 months. Non parole period of 1 year 1 month.
Catchwords:	CRIME – Robbery whilst armed with an offensive weapon- of a service station MENTAL HEALTH - Criminal proceedings - offender found unfit to be tried offender by District Court - found fit by Mental Health Review Tribunal SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence - guilty plea at first opportunity after offender found fit- mental illness had causative relationship to offence - background of deprivation – sentencing mentally ill offenders - early exposure to drug use and domestic violence - seriousness of offence - guideline judgment - community protection - risk to community - demonstrated progress toward rehabilitation - structure of sentence
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act1999 Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58 Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195; 172 A Crim R 371 DPP v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; (2010) 79 NSWLR 1 Engert v R (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 Kesavarajah v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 230; [1994] HCA 41 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600: [2013] HCA 38 Porter v R [2008] NSWCCA 145 Presser v R [1958] VR 45 R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255 Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14 Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629; [2003] HCA 14
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Nyeasha Rose Hoskins (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr J Hibbard (for the offender) Solicitors: Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Limited (for the offender) Ms K Stanley (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2020/00198906