District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jarrod Craig Hussey [2019] NSWDC 34 Hearing dates: 21 November 2018 Decision date: 28 February 2019 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Mahony SC DCJ Decision: Sentence of full-time custody to be served by Intensive Correction Order. For orders see [39]
Catchwords: Possession of firearm Legislation Cited: Firearms Act 1996
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999Cases Cited: R v Farrell [2015] NSWCCA 68
R v Pullen [2018] NSWCCA 264Category: Sentence Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Jarrod Craig Hussey (Offender)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
E James (Offender)
S Fliegner (Crown Solicitor)
File Number(s): 16/376026 Publication restriction: Nil
REMARKS ON SENTENCE
-
On 18 September 2018 the offender pleaded not guilty on arraignment to an offence pursuant to s 7(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 as follows:
On 19 November 2015, at Homebush West, in the State of New South Wales, did possess a prohibited pistol, namely, 9mm IMI Baby Eagle pistol, not being authorised to do so by a licence or permit.
-
The trial proceeded by judge alone and on 21 September 2018 I entered a verdict of guilty. My reasons for that verdict, and my findings of fact are set out in my judgment on verdict. Those findings led to a conclusion that, at the relevant time, the offender was in possession of the subject firearm pursuant to the extended definition of possession contained in s 4 and s 4A of the Firearms Act 1996.
-
The maximum penalty for the offence is 14 years imprisonment and there is a Standard Non-Parole Period of 4 years imprisonment.
The sentence hearing
-
The sentence hearing took place on 21 November 2018. The Crown Sentence Summary became Ex A. It included my judgment on verdict. It also contained the offender’s criminal antecedents as follows.
-
On 31 January 2017 at Liverpool Local Court the offender was sentenced in respect of the following four offences:
8 December 2015 – armed with intent to commit indictable offence – Intensive Correction Order for 12 months commencing 31 January 2017.
8 December 2015 – common assault – ICO 12 months
23 June 2016 – possess prohibited drug – S 9 Bond 12 months.
23 June 2016 – possess prohibited drug – ICO 12 months commencing 31 January 2017 on conditions.
-
Each of those offences occurred after the subject offence.
-
Exhibit B was a Sentencing Assessment Report under the hand of Mr Chris Hanna dated 18 October 2018. Under the heading “Factors Related to Offending”, the author noted that the offender attributed his offending behaviour to his choice of poor associates. Since leaving the Australian Army, he had formed ties with an outlaw motorcycle group. The author noted that he partially agreed with the police facts, however, he stated that “the evidence was poor and he felt that he should not have been found guilty of the offence”. The offender expressed the view that he was found guilty based on a technicality as he was unaware that there were firearms at his…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Jarrod Craig Hussey and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2019] NSWDC 34
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered several factors in determining the sentence, including the nature and circumstances of the offence, the offender’s culpability, and the need for general and specific deterrence. The court found that Hussey's actions were reckless and demonstrated a lack of regard for the law. The firearm in question was loaded, and Hussey had a previous conviction for possessing a firearm, which increased the gravity of the current offence. However, the court also took into account mitigating factors, such as Hussey's guilty plea, his remorse, and his limited criminal history. The court concluded that a sentence of full-time custody would not be appropriate given Hussey’s personal circumstances and decided on an Intensive Correction Order instead.
The court ordered that Hussey serve a sentence of full-time custody, to be served by an Intensive Correction Order. The order includes various conditions, such as regular reporting to a correction officer, participating in a rehabilitation program, and abstaining from consuming alcohol or using drugs. The court also ordered Hussey to pay a fine and a victim surcharge. The decision reflects the court's aim to balance the need for punishment with the potential for rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
Orders
Orders of the court
Sentence of full-time custody to be served by Intensive Correction Order. For orders see [39]
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.