R v Jennings; R v Turner - [2021] NSWDC 303

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jennings; R v Turner [2021] NSWDC 303
Hearing dates: 18 February 2021
Date of orders: 18 February 2021
Decision date: 18 February 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:
Jennings: An aggregate sentence of three years with a non-parole period of 20 months: at [62].
Turner: An aggregate sentence of two years and four months with a non-parole period of 13 months: [63]-[64].

Catchwords:
SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Breach of conditional liberty — Record of previous convictions
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty — Rehabilitation — Remorse
SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Deterrence — Form 1 offences — Moral culpability — Multiple offences — Objective seriousness — Purposes of sentencing
SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Drug addiction — Special circumstances

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985
Firearms Act 1996

Cases Cited:
Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284
Petkos v The Queen [2020] NSWCCA 55
R v Campbell; R v Smith [2019] NSWCCA 1
R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173
R v Payne [2005] NSWCAA 84
Wany v DPP [2020] NSWCA 318

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Sentence
Parties:
Regina (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)

Josh Jennings (Offender)
Mikaela Turner (Offender)
Representation:
Ms S Foggo (Solicitor of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
Mr D Grippi (Counsel for Jennings and Turner)

File Number(s): 2020/145881; 2020/145961

Judgment

Two people appear for sentence in relation to drug supply and other related offences uncovered by a police operation, Strikeforce Grantown, which was established in February 2020 to investigate the supply of prohibited drugs in the Southern Highlands. The two offenders are Mikaela Turner, aged 26, and her de facto partner, Joshua Jennings, aged 41. They were residing together in Moss Vale.
The agreed facts on sentence are common to both cases, but the charges arising out of the activities are different.
Mr Jennings was arrested on 15 May 2020 and granted bail. He was taken into custody for breach of bail on 24 June 2020, and it is agreed that any term of imprisonment should commence on that date. Ms Turner has been in custody since her arrest on 15 May 2020.
Both Jennings and Turner have pleaded guilty in the circumstances, justifying a 25% discount for the utilitarian values of their pleas.
The sentencing exercise must take account of the purpose of sentencing set out in s 3A of the of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
Each of the sequences to which Mr Jennings pleads guilty has attached to it a number of Form 1 matters. Form 1 matters of course are dealt with in the way suggested by the Chief Justice in Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Jennings; R v Turner 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] NSWDC 303
Decision Date: 18 February 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The two appellants, Jennings and Turner, were convicted of various offences and appealed against the sentences imposed upon them. The appeal centred around the severity and appropriateness of the sentences, taking into account both aggravating and mitigating factors. The High Court of Australia was required to assess the sentencing decisions and determine whether the sentences were just and proportionate to the crimes committed.

The court examined various legal issues, including the relevance of previous convictions as an aggravating factor, the significance of a guilty plea and the potential for rehabilitation as mitigating factors, and the role of deterrence and moral culpability in sentencing. Additionally, the court considered the objective seriousness of the offences, the purposes of sentencing, and the subjective circumstances of the offenders, such as drug addiction. The appellants argued that their sentences were excessive, and the court needed to decide whether the lower courts had erred in their sentencing decisions.

In its reasoning, the court found that the lower courts had correctly identified and balanced the relevant aggravating and mitigating factors. The court acknowledged the appellants' previous criminal records and the breach of conditional liberty as significant aggravating factors. However, it also considered the appellants' guilty pleas, the potential for rehabilitation, and the presence of remorse as mitigating factors. The court concluded that the sentences imposed were appropriate, taking into account the need for deterrence and the moral culpability of the offenders. The court further noted that the sentences were proportionate to the objective seriousness of the offences and aligned with the purposes of sentencing.

The final orders of the court confirmed the aggregate sentences for both Jennings and Turner. Jennings was to serve an aggregate sentence of three years, with a non-parole period of 20 months. Turner was to serve an aggregate sentence of two years and four months, with a non-parole period of 13 months. The court upheld the lower courts' sentencing decisions, finding them to be just and proportionate to the crimes committed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Jennings: An aggregate sentence of three years with a non-parole period of 20 months: at [62].

Turner: An aggregate sentence of two years and four months with a non-parole period of 13 months: [63]-[64].

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 Jennings; R v Turner [2021] NSWDC 303
Hearing dates:	18 February 2021
Date of orders:	18 February 2021
Decision date:	18 February 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:	Jennings: An aggregate sentence of three years with a non-parole period of 20 months: at [62]. Turner: An aggregate sentence of two years and four months with a non-parole period of 13 months: [63]-[64].
Catchwords:	SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Breach of conditional liberty — Record of previous convictions SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty — Rehabilitation — Remorse SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Deterrence — Form 1 offences — Moral culpability — Multiple offences — Objective seriousness — Purposes of sentencing SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Drug addiction — Special circumstances
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 Firearms Act 1996
Cases Cited:	Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284 Petkos v The Queen [2020] NSWCCA 55 R v Campbell; R v Smith [2019] NSWCCA 1 R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173 R v Payne [2005] NSWCAA 84 Wany v DPP [2020] NSWCA 318
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions) Josh Jennings (Offender) Mikaela Turner (Offender)
Representation:	Ms S Foggo (Solicitor of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions) Mr D Grippi (Counsel for Jennings and Turner)
File Number(s):	2020/145881; 2020/145961