Legal Research
Cases
R v Jackson

R v Jackson

Case [2024] NSWCCA 156 21 August 2024

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jackson [2024] NSWCCA 156
Hearing dates: 14 June 2024
Date of orders: 21 August 2024
Decision date: 21 August 2024
Before: Kirk JA at [1]
Campbell J at [2]
McNaughton J at [3]
Decision:
(1) Allow the appeal.
(2) Quash the sentence imposed on the respondent in the District Court on 22 February 2024, and in lieu thereof, sentence the respondent to a term of imprisonment of 6 years with a non-parole period of 4 years, commencing on 16 November 2023. The date the respondent is first eligible for release to parole is 15 November 2027.

Catchwords:
CRIME – sentencing – appeal by Crown against sentence – sexual intercourse without consent – where offending occurred in circumstances of geographical isolation – where age and power differential between victim and respondent – whether sentence manifestly inadequate – whether residual discretion should not be exercised – appeal allowed

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61I, 61J
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A, 44

Cases Cited:
AA v R [2024] NSWCCA 132
Bugmyv The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Cahyadi v R [2007] NSWCCA 1; (2007) 168 A Crim R 41
CMB v Attorney General forthe State ofNew South Wales (2015) 256 CLR 346; [2015] HCA 9
Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54
Dionnet v R [2009] NSWCCA 85
Greenv The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
Kelly v R [2022] NSWCCA 189
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
R v Gavel [2014] NSWCCA 56; (2014) 239 A Crim R 469
R v Hernando [2002] NSWCCA 489; (2002) 136 A Crim R 451
R v O’Connor [2014] NSWCCA 53; (2014) 239 A Crime R 487
R v Shortland [2018] NSWCCA 34
R v Simpson (2001) 53 NSWLR 704; [2001] NSWCCA 534
R v Songcuan(No 3) [2023] NSWSC 183
Stein v R [2023] NSWCCA 324

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Rex (Appellant)
Glen William Jackson (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
G Newton SC (Appellant)
J Lo Schiavo (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Appellant)
Abernethy Gore Solicitors (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2022/128520
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

22 February 2024

Before:

M L Williams SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2022/128520

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

The respondent, Glen William Jackson, was convicted of four counts of sexual intercourse without consent contrary to s 61I of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). He was acquitted of an alternative count of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent. The offending took place on a farm near Goulburn where the responded resided with his 10 year old daughter. The…

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 Jackson

Details

AGLC: R v Jackson [2024] NSWCCA 156
Case: [2024] NSWCCA 156
Decision Date: 21 August 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Jackson was heard by the Court of Criminal Appeal. The respondent, Jackson, was convicted of engaging in sexual intercourse without the consent of the victim. The Crown appealed against the sentence imposed on Jackson, arguing that it was manifestly inadequate. The nature of the dispute involved the severity of the sentence given to Jackson for his crime, which was committed under circumstances of geographical isolation and involved an age and power differential between Jackson and the victim.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence imposed by the lower court was manifestly inadequate and whether the court should exercise its residual discretion to increase the sentence. The Crown argued that the sentence did not reflect the seriousness of the offence and failed to adequately account for the circumstances in which the offence occurred. The defence contended that the original sentence was appropriate and that there was no basis for the court to exercise its residual discretion.

In determining these issues, the court considered the nature and circumstances of the offence, including the geographical isolation and the age and power differential between Jackson and the victim. The court held that the sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate and did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offence. The court found that the original sentence failed to appropriately account for the circumstances in which the offence occurred and that the residual discretion should be exercised to increase the sentence. The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was increased.

The court ordered that Jackson's sentence be increased to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period of six years. The court also made orders for Jackson to be subject to a number of post-release conditions, including a sex offender registration requirement and a prohibition on contact with the victim.

Orders