R v Huggett - [2020] NSWDC 117

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Huggett [2020] NSWDC 117
Hearing dates: 06 September 2018, 29 November 2018, 31 January 2019, 07 March 2019, 08 July 2019, 30 October 2019, 05 November 2019 & 05 February 2020
Date of orders: 28 February 2020
Decision date: 28 February 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:
State offences – aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years
Federal offence – term of imprisonment of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 2 years

Catchwords: SENTENCING — Federal offenders — Relevant considerations
SENTENCING — Federal offenders — Sentence by State court for offence against Commonwealth law
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Deterrence — General deterrence
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Deterrence — Specific deterrence
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — General principles
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Aggregate sentences
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Accumulation, concurrency and totality
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Purposes of sentencing
SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Expert reports
SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Reasons for sentence
SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Special circumstances
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Code Act 1995
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited: R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 107
R v Porte [2015] NSWCCA 174
Xiao v The Queen [2018] 96 NSWLR 1
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Owen John Huggett (Offender)
Representation:
Michael Tsiavlis (Commonwealth Crown)
Wali Shukoor (counsel) (Offender)
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Sydney Criminal Lawyers (Offender)

File Number(s): 2017/00056513

INTRODUCTION

Owen John Huggett, the offender, is to be sentenced for three offences. The first of those arises from his use of a carriage service to access child pornography contrary to s 474.19(1)(a)(i) Criminal Code (Cth). The second and third are for offences of possession of child abuse material contrary to s 91H (2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The offences contrary to the Crimes Act are before the Court as related offences to be dealt with as summary offences pursuant to s 166 Criminal Procedure Act 1986.

MAXIMUM PENALTIES

The maximum penalty specified for the Commonwealth offence is imprisonment for 15 years. The maximum penalty for the New South Wales offences is in each case imprisonment for 10 years, but, of course, those charges are before the Court as related offences. The maximum penalty to which the offender is exposed in each case is imprisonment for two years. The standard non-parole period provisions are not relevant to the determination of those sentences.

PLEAS OF GUILTY

The utility of the pleas of guilty in this instance is qualified because of the history of the prosecution, leading eventually to these proceedings on sentence. After a number of adjournments, the offender ultimately maintained his guilt for these offences when the matter was last before the Court on 5 February 2020, from whence it was adjourned to 12 February…

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 Huggett

Details

AGLC: R v Huggett [2020] NSWDC 117
Case: [2020] NSWDC 117
Decision Date: 28 February 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Huggett was before the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the appellant, Huggett, was convicted of multiple offences under both state and federal law. The state charges included drug trafficking, possession of a firearm, and possession of a prohibited weapon, while the federal charge was related to the importation of a controlled drug. Huggett appealed his sentence, arguing that it was excessive and did not adequately reflect the principles of sentencing.

The court was required to determine whether the sentence imposed was appropriate, considering the principles of general and specific deterrence, the purposes of sentencing, and the need to ensure consistency and proportionality in sentencing for both state and federal offences. The court also needed to consider whether the total sentence imposed, which included both state and federal sentences, adhered to the principles of accumulation, concurrency, and totality.

The Supreme Court of Victoria found that the sentence was not excessive, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, the need for general and specific deterrence, and the objectives of sentencing. The court acknowledged that while the total sentence was substantial, it was necessary to reflect the gravity of the crimes committed and to ensure that similar offences would be met with a severe penalty. The court also highlighted that the sentence allowed for Huggett to be adequately rehabilitated and deterred from reoffending. In addition, the court noted that the sentence was proportionate to the crimes committed and was consistent with sentences imposed for similar offences.

The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentences were upheld. Huggett was to serve a term of imprisonment of 2 years for the state offences, and a term of 3 years 4 months for the federal offence, with a non-parole period of 2 years.

Orders

Orders of the court

State offences – aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years

Federal offence – term of imprisonment of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 2 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 Huggett [2020] NSWDC 117
Hearing dates:	06 September 2018, 29 November 2018, 31 January 2019, 07 March 2019, 08 July 2019, 30 October 2019, 05 November 2019 & 05 February 2020
Date of orders:	28 February 2020
Decision date:	28 February 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:	State offences – aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years Federal offence – term of imprisonment of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 2 years
Catchwords:	SENTENCING — Federal offenders — Relevant considerations SENTENCING — Federal offenders — Sentence by State court for offence against Commonwealth law SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Deterrence — General deterrence SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Deterrence — Specific deterrence SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — General principles SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Aggregate sentences SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Accumulation, concurrency and totality SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Purposes of sentencing SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Expert reports SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Reasons for sentence SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Special circumstances
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Code Act 1995 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 107 R v Porte [2015] NSWCCA 174 Xiao v The Queen [2018] 96 NSWLR 1
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Owen John Huggett (Offender)
Representation:	Michael Tsiavlis (Commonwealth Crown) Wali Shukoor (counsel) (Offender) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Sydney Criminal Lawyers (Offender)
File Number(s):	2017/00056513