R v Inu

[2019] NSWDC 783

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Inu [2019] NSWDC 783
Hearing dates:	6 December 2019
Decision date:	06 December 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Colefax SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years 6 months with a non parole period of 2 years 3 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME - SENTENCE - robbery in company
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s.97(1)
Cases Cited:	R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Rimo Inu (Offender)
Representation:	Mr Valerio (ODPP Campbelltown) Ms Savage (Solicitor for the offender)
File Number(s):	2018/77612; 2019/77612
Publication restriction:	Nil

judgment​

1. Rimo Inu (otherwise known as Rimo Leleai) you appear for sentence today in relation to two offences. 

2. Each offence is the offence of robbery in company. The offences involve contraventions of s 97(1) of the Crimes Act.  The maximum penalty for each offence is 20 years' imprisonment.  There is no standard non‑parole period.  There is, however, a relevant guideline judgment from the Court of Criminal Appeal of R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346.

3. The facts surrounding the offending are contained in the document entitled "Agreed Facts", supplemented by other uncontroversial material.  The facts can be sufficiently restated as follows.

4. On 15 December 2018, you were on bail for five matters: three matters of destroying or damage property; one matter of stalk or intimidate; and one matter of common assault. 

5. On 15 December 2018, Mr Lovan had been enjoying his evening at the Stardust Hotel and he had had some success on the poker machines.  He had $400 in his pocket. 

6. At about 9.30 in the evening, having enjoyed himself, Mr Lovan left that hotel and was walking to the car park.  He was followed by a group of young men, of which you were one. 

7. When Mr Lovan was in an isolated spot, one of this group, possibly you, shouted out, "Let's get him".

8. One of the group, possibly you, punched Mr Lovan to the face and pushed him to the ground. 

9. One of the group, possibly you, then stole his wallet. 

10. Whilst one of the group stole the wallet, the other two held Mr Lovan's arms. 

11. Having robbed him, the group ran off. 

12. Mr Lovan followed you because it was you who had his wallet - whether or not it was you who took it from his person. 

13. These are essentially the facts concerning the first offence of robbery in company.

14. In terms of its objective seriousness for an offence of its kind, it is somewhere equidistant between the middle and the bottom of the range. 

15. It is additionally aggravated by the fact, as I have said, that you were on conditional liberty.

16. Two days later, on 17 December 2018 at 9pm, Mr Nguyen had finished taking an English class.  He met up with his 13 year old son somewhere near Woolworths at Cabramatta.  They were walking home, this father and son, minding their own business, but they were being followed.  They were being followed by a group of young people of which you were one.

17. As Mr Nguyen and his son got close to their home, the son became aware that he and his father were being followed.

18. At around about that time, one of the group grabbed Mr Nguyen from behind and grabbed him around his throat.  Another of the group pushed Mr Nguyen over a small brick wall, such that he fell to the ground.  Two of this cowardly group then held Mr Nguyen down whilst the third effected a robbery.

19. As this event was occurring, the 13 year old boy ran off for help. 

20. One of the three in the group had something sharp in her or his hand and Mr Nguyen felt a sharp object project into the left side of his stomach, but there was no penetration. 

21. Mr Nguyen was robbed of his wallet and backpack. 

22. These facts constitute the second principal offence. 

23. In terms of its objective seriousness for an offence of its kind, it is also somewhere equidistant between the middle and the bottom of the range.

24. It is additionally aggravated not only by the fact that you were on conditional liberty, but also because it was committed in the presence of a child. 

25. You were ultimately arrested on 18 December 2018 and, when interviewed by police, you told lies. 

26. You have remained in custody, solely referrable to these two offences, since you were arrested on 18 December 2018.

27. Your subjective circumstances, that is those things about you personally, have come to the Court through a sentencing assessment report from which I have learnt the following. 

28. You are now 20 years of age.  You were 19 when you committed these offences. 

29. You were born in Samoa and your family came to this country in 2007. You completed school at year 10 and have worked in a warehouse since that time.  It is said that your employer will offer you employment upon your release from custody.  However, that fact has not been able to be confirmed.

30. Apart from the five matters for which you were on bail at the time of the offences, you have only one other matter on your record, and that is having a knife in a public place. 

31. I note that, in relation to all of those other matters, they were dealt with by means of a conditional release order. 

32. In these circumstances, I intend to deal with you as if you were a first offender and therefore extend to you the leniency which, in appropriate circumstances, can be given to a first offender.

33. You have been using illicit substances since you were 13.  The nature of the illicit substances you have used is not identified with precision in the sentencing assessment report. 

34. You have a child to a young woman.  The nature of your relationship with her is difficult to be certain about.  You have told the author of the sentencing assessment report that you and she plan to live together when you are released from custody. But the sentencing assessment report also tells me that she has taken out an apprehended domestic violence order against you.  It is not possible for me to conclude one way or the other whether you will have any support from that young woman when you leave custody. 

35. You do, however, have the support of a loving family. 

36. Although there is a history of violence and aggressive behaviour, there is no diagnosis of any mental health issues.

37. Because of your age and the lack of criminal antecedents, your prospects of rehabilitation, in my view, are reasonable. 

38. It is well known, and the Court conscious of the fact, that a young man at 19 is barely an adult and the authorities direct that, within appropriate parameters, considerable leniency should be given to such young men. But also, I am bound by the decision in R v Henry, which does take into account the youthful age of the offender. 

39. All your co‑offenders were juveniles and therefore parity is of no particular relevance.

40. In concluding that your prospects of rehabilitation are reasonable, I do not have the benefit of any direct expression of remorse on your part.  You told the authors of the sentencing assessment report that you were regretful, but you did not do so in the witness box.  Nevertheless, that fact does not lead me to doubt the assessment that I have already given.

41. That being said, considerations of general and specific deterrence are fully engaged.

42. You pleaded guilty at an early opportunity and you will be given a 25% discount for the pleas of guilty. 

43. I intend imposing an aggregate sentence. 

44. Consequently, it is necessary for me to state the indicative sentences underpinning that aggregate sentence.

45. In relation to the first offence, except for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months.  Because of the plea of guilty, the indicative sentence is 2 years, 7 months.

46. In relation to the second offence, except for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months.  Because of the plea, the indicative sentence is 3 years and 4 months. 

47. In the result, there will be an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months to date from 18 December 2018.  Because of your age and because this is your first time in custody, I make a finding of special circumstances to vary the ratio of the head sentence to the non‑parole period. 

48. I therefore fix a non‑parole period of 2 years and 3 months to date from 18 December 2018 and which will expire on 17 March 2021. 

49. I fix a balance of 2 years and 3 months to date from 18 March 2021 and which will expire on 17 June 2023.

50. Whether you are admitted to parole, Mr Inu, on 18 March 2021 will depend upon how you perform in custody.  If you perform well, you are likely to be granted parole.  If you do not, it is likely you will not. 

51. You will now go with the officers.

Decision last updated: 30 January 2020