R v Hura - [2022] NSWDC 95

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hura [2022] NSWDC 95
Hearing dates: 16 March 2022
Date of orders: 16 March 2022
Decision date: 16 March 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Wilson SC DCJ
Decision:
Ex tempore reasons given in court

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing- aggravated break and enter with intent to commit serious indictable offence- damage property- robbery with an offensive weapon.

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 97(1), 112(2) and 195
Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 3A, 7 and 66

Cases Cited:
R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111
Harris v R [2021] NSWCCA 322

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Dylan Charles Hura
Representation: Crown: Ms K Thomson (Solicitor)
Offender: Mr R Hussey (Counsel)

File Number(s): 2020/251735
Publication restriction: None

Judgment

Introduction

The offender, Dylan Charles Hura, appears for sentence today in relation to a number of offences, two of which occurred on the same day and the third on a separate day.
The first matter for sentence is sequence 1 which is aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence. The aggravation was by reason of the fact that the offender was aware that somebody was in the premises. That is in breach of s 112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 and has a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment with a standard non‑parole period of five years.
The second principal count for sentence is sequence 3 which occurred on 15 June 2019 and is robbery armed with an offensive instrument, namely a brick, in breach of s 97(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. That offence carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment and there is no standard non‑parole period.
On a s 166 certificate the offender has admitted his guilt in relation to a charge of damage property, being sequence 2, and has asked that he be sentenced for that matter in this Court. In the Local Court it carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and/or 50 penalty units.
The chronology in exhibit A includes that on 17 February 2019 the offending in relation to sequence 1 and sequence 2 occurred. The co‑offender, Mr Bottrell, was arrested and charged on 19 February 2019.
On 15 June 2019 the offending the subject of sequence 3 occurred.
The co‑offender of the 17 February 2019 offending, Mr Bottrell, was committed for sentence and eventually sentenced in this Court on 20 November 2019.
Mr Hura presented to Wyong Police Station on 27 May 2020 at which time a swab was taken and he was then released pending further investigation. On 29 August 2020 he was arrested and charged. He was granted conditional bail on 30 August 2020 and committed for sentence to this Court on 16 November 2021. He has spent one night or two days in custody referrable to the subject offending.

Agreed Facts

Offences on 17 February 2019

The facts agreed between the parties and signed by the offender include the following.
He was born 26…

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 Hura

Details

AGLC: R v Hura [2022] NSWDC 95
Case: [2022] NSWDC 95
Decision Date: 16 March 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Hura involved the appellant who was convicted of aggravated break and enter with intent to commit a serious indictable offence, as well as damaging property and robbery with an offensive weapon. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The appellant, represented by counsel, was sentenced on the charges brought against him by the Crown. The Crown was represented by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The key legal issues that the court had to decide involved the appropriate sentence for the appellant, taking into account the severity of the offences committed. The court needed to determine the appropriate weight to give to various factors, such as the appellant's criminal history, the circumstances of the offence, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The court also had to consider the sentencing principles and guidelines established in previous cases, as well as any relevant statutory provisions.

The court delivered its reasons ex tempore, meaning that it provided its reasons for the sentence orally in court. The court took into account the appellant's criminal history, which included previous convictions for similar offences. The court also considered the severity of the offences committed, including the use of an offensive weapon and the damage caused to property. The court emphasised the need for deterrence and rehabilitation, and considered the appropriate sentence to achieve these objectives. The court ultimately determined that the appropriate sentence for the appellant was a term of imprisonment, with specific details of the sentence given orally in court.

Orders

Orders of the court

Ex tempore reasons given in court

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 Hura [2022] NSWDC 95
Hearing dates:	16 March 2022
Date of orders:	16 March 2022
Decision date:	16 March 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Wilson SC DCJ
Decision:	Ex tempore reasons given in court
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing- aggravated break and enter with intent to commit serious indictable offence- damage property- robbery with an offensive weapon.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 97(1), 112(2) and 195 Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 3A, 7 and 66
Cases Cited:	R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111 Harris v R [2021] NSWCCA 322
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Dylan Charles Hura
Representation:	Crown: Ms K Thomson (Solicitor) Offender: Mr R Hussey (Counsel)
File Number(s):	2020/251735
Publication restriction:	None