R v Jessee Lionel Murray

[2017] NSWDC 466

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Jessee Lionel MURRAY [2017] NSWDC 466
Hearing dates:	25 August 2017
Date of orders:	25 August 2017
Decision date:	25 August 2017
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 3 years 9 months. Non parole period of 2 years 8 months.
Catchwords:	SENTENCE – Aggravated robbery – early guilty plea – impact on victim and community – importance of even handed and comprehensive psychiatric reports – history of deprivation as a child – majority of last 16 years spent in custody – incapable of adapting to normal community life without assistance – problems adapting when prisoner released support – institutionalisation – impact of mental illness – need for treatment – need for structured release plan – community protection.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Buxton v R [2017] NSWCCA 169 Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Jessee Lionel MURRAY (Offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Solicitors: Mr Hunter (For the offender) Ms Walshe (For the Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2016/00295784

Judgment – ex tempore revised

1. Jessee Murray was committed from the Local Court for sentence having indicated an early guilty plea to an offence of aggravated robbery. The particulars of the offence are that he used corporal violence and inflicted actual bodily harm on Mr Yadav, who was the console operator of the Tarrawanna Post Office.

2. The offence occurred on 4 October 2016. The evidence indicates that Mr Murray took no more than $21 from the Post Office.

3. The offence carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment. That remains an important guide to the exercise of my sentencing discretion. It is accepted that so serious was the offence that only full-time custody could or should be imposed.

4. Other guidance to the exercise of my discretion includes decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal, including the longstanding authority of Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346. A recent decision, Buxton v R [2017] NSWCCA 169 and a number of other cases are referred to there. I have also had regard to the sentencing patterns of this Court. I note that this is the third similar matter, quite independently, I have dealt with in Wollongong District Court today, including another robbery of a Post Office.

5. In each of today’s earlier matters the offender’s also had very long custodial histories. They had not been deterred personally by the severe penalties that had previously been imposed upon them. It is not for me to engage in any discussion as to the utility of general deterrent sentences on people with mental health and drug problems. They were fully canvassed by the Court in Henry. The Court of Criminal Appeal in that case took the view that the objects of sentencing, including general deterrence, were and should, remain significant in matters such as this.

6. Every case,…