R v Jarrod Smith - [2018] NSWDC 208

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jarrod Smith [2018] NSWDC 208
Hearing dates: Trial: 27 February 2018 – 1 March 2018, 6 March 2018 – 9 March 2018 and 12 March 2018Sentence: 25 May 2018
Date of orders: 29 May 2018
Decision date: 29 May 2018
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Hatzistergos DCJ
Decision:
1 The Offender is convicted on each count and sentenced by way of an aggregate sentence.
2 The Offender is sentenced to serve an aggregate term of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment to date from 15 January 2018 and to expire on 14 May 2020.
3 The Offender is to serve a non-parole period of 15 months to date from 15 January 2018 and to expire on 14 April 2019. He is thereafter to be released to parole under supervision of Community Corrections to serve an additional term of 13 months to date from 15 April 2019 and to expire on 14 May 2020. The earliest release date is to be 14 April 2019.
4 Although the Offender is now 27 years of age, I would recommend to the Commissioner for Corrective Services that consideration be given to the offender being admitted to the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme.

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Break and enter a dwelling house with intent to commit a serious indictable offence – Assault occasioning actual bodily harm
SENTENCING – Objective seriousness at lower end of spectrum – no aggravating factors advanced – record of prior convictions not significant – good character not established – remorse not established – low to medium risk of reoffending – good prospects of rehabilitation – special circumstances established
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 4, 59(1), 113(2)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 3(1), 21A, 44
Cases Cited: R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383
R v Huynh [2015] NSWCCA 220
Georgopolous v R [2010] NSWCCA 246
DPP (Cth) v Beattie [2017] NSWCCA 301
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Jarrod Smith (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms Y Prowse (Crown)
Mr P Godkin (Offender)
Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
McGowan Lawyers (Offender)

File Number(s): 2016/0224755
Publication restriction: N/A

Remarks on Sentence

On 12 March 2008, following a trial commencing on 27 February 2018 the Offender Jarrod Smith was found Guilty of two offences in the following terms:-

On 22 July 2016, in North Richmond in the State of New South Wales Jarrod Smith did break and enter into a dwelling house with intent to commit a serious indictable offence namely intimidation in circumstances of aggravation, namely that he knew a person was present within the dwelling house contrary to s 113(2) of the Crimes Act 1900.

On 22 July 2016, in North Richmond in the State of New South Wales, Jarrod Smith did assault Brodie Symington, thereby occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to s 59(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. [1]
1. Hereinafter referred to as the “1900 Act”

Following the jury’s verdicts, I granted…

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 Jarrod Smith

Details

AGLC: R v Jarrod Smith [2018] NSWDC 208
Case: [2018] NSWDC 208
Decision Date: 29 May 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Jarrod Smith was heard in a court in Australia, where the defendant, Jarrod Smith, was charged with breaking and entering a dwelling house with the intent to commit a serious indictable offence, and with assaulting someone, occasioning actual bodily harm. The case involved a dispute over the severity of the crimes committed by Smith, and the appropriate sentence that should be imposed. The court was tasked with determining the objective seriousness of the crimes, the presence of any aggravating factors, the significance of Smith's prior criminal record, the extent of his remorse, and the likelihood of him reoffending in the future. The court also had to consider the possibility of Smith being admitted to the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme.

The legal issues before the court included the objective seriousness of the crimes committed, the presence of any aggravating factors, the significance of Smith's prior criminal record, the extent of his remorse, and the likelihood of him reoffending in the future. The court had to consider the objective seriousness of the crimes, the presence of any aggravating factors, the significance of Smith's prior criminal record, the extent of his remorse, and the likelihood of him reoffending in the future. The court also had to consider the possibility of Smith being admitted to the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme.

The court found that the objective seriousness of the crimes was at the lower end of the spectrum, with no aggravating factors present. While Smith had a prior criminal record, it was not deemed significant. The court did not find that Smith had established good character or remorse, and determined that he was at a low to medium risk of reoffending. The court also found that Smith had good prospects of rehabilitation, and recommended that he be considered for the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme. Based on these findings, the court imposed an aggregate sentence of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 15 months.

The court made several orders in relation to the sentence. The court convicted Smith on each count and sentenced him by way of an aggregate sentence. The court ordered that Smith serve a non-parole period of 15 months, and thereafter be released to parole under supervision of Community Corrections to serve an additional term of 13 months. The court also recommended that Smith be considered for the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme. The earliest release date for Smith is 14 April 2019.

Orders

Orders of the court

1 The Offender is convicted on each count and sentenced by way of an aggregate sentence.

2 The Offender is sentenced to serve an aggregate term of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment to date from 15 January 2018 and to expire on 14 May 2020.

3 The Offender is to serve a non-parole period of 15 months to date from 15 January 2018 and to expire on 14 April 2019. He is thereafter to be released to parole under supervision of Community Corrections to serve an additional term of 13 months to date from 15 April 2019 and to expire on 14 May 2020. The earliest release date is to be 14 April 2019.

4 Although the Offender is now 27 years of age, I would recommend to the Commissioner for Corrective Services that consideration be given to the offender being admitted to the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme.

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 Jarrod Smith [2018] NSWDC 208
Hearing dates:	Trial: 27 February 2018 – 1 March 2018, 6 March 2018 – 9 March 2018 and 12 March 2018Sentence: 25 May 2018
Date of orders:	29 May 2018
Decision date:	29 May 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Hatzistergos DCJ
Decision:	1 The Offender is convicted on each count and sentenced by way of an aggregate sentence. 2 The Offender is sentenced to serve an aggregate term of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment to date from 15 January 2018 and to expire on 14 May 2020. 3 The Offender is to serve a non-parole period of 15 months to date from 15 January 2018 and to expire on 14 April 2019. He is thereafter to be released to parole under supervision of Community Corrections to serve an additional term of 13 months to date from 15 April 2019 and to expire on 14 May 2020. The earliest release date is to be 14 April 2019. 4 Although the Offender is now 27 years of age, I would recommend to the Commissioner for Corrective Services that consideration be given to the offender being admitted to the Corrective Services Young Adult Offender’s Programme.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Break and enter a dwelling house with intent to commit a serious indictable offence – Assault occasioning actual bodily harm SENTENCING – Objective seriousness at lower end of spectrum – no aggravating factors advanced – record of prior convictions not significant – good character not established – remorse not established – low to medium risk of reoffending – good prospects of rehabilitation – special circumstances established
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 4, 59(1), 113(2) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 3(1), 21A, 44
Cases Cited:	R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383 R v Huynh [2015] NSWCCA 220 Georgopolous v R [2010] NSWCCA 246 DPP (Cth) v Beattie [2017] NSWCCA 301
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Jarrod Smith (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Ms Y Prowse (Crown) Mr P Godkin (Offender) Solicitors: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) McGowan Lawyers (Offender)
File Number(s):	2016/0224755
Publication restriction:	N/A