R v John Arthur BLAIKIE - [2007] NSWDC 311

CITATION: R v John Arthur BLAIKIE [2007] NSWDC 311

JUDGMENT DATE:
10 August 2007

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Norrish QC DCJ

DECISION: See paragraphs 65 to 70

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Possession of housebreaking implements - Enter land with intent to steal - Break and enter with intent - Breaking entering and steal - "Special circumstances"

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Veen (No 2) v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365
R v Shankley [2003] NSWCCA 253
R v Hammoud [2000] NSWCCA 540
R v Moffitt (1990) 20 NSWLR 114
R v Ponfield [1999] NSWCCA 435
R v Harris [2007] NSWCCA 130
R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67

PARTIES: Regina v John Arthur Blaikie

FILE NUMBER(S): 04/21/0222, 06/21/0008

COUNSEL: Ms Cinque - Crown
Mr Conomos - Offender

SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: Mr Blaikie, the sentences I propose to impose on you are as follows. In relation to the offences committed in 2004 I propose to date those sentences, I have given you the benefit of a couple of days I must confess on the time spent in custody, from 1 May 2005, that takes into account, in my view, all presentence custody plus a few odd days. I propose to sentence you in relation to the first count, that is possession of housebreaking implements, to sixteen months imprisonment. That involves a ten per cent discount. In relation to the offence of enter land with intent to steal I propose to sentence you to two years eight months imprisonment. That represents a ten per cent discount. Those two sentences will be concurrent one with the other, and dated from 1 May 2005.

2 In relation to the matter to which you pleaded last year, the break and enter with intent, carrying with it a maximum penalty of ten years, taking into account the matter on the Form 1, I sentence you to three years imprisonment. That sentence will date from 1 May 2006. It will be partially, therefore, accumulative upon the other sentences.

3 In relation to the matter that you were found guilty of at trial, count one, the break, enter and steal, I propose to sentence you to four years imprisonment. That will date from 1 May 2007.

4 In relation to count two I propose to sentence you to two years imprisonment. That will date from 1 May 2007. In respect of the sentence of four years I propose to fix a non-parole period of two years and that will expire, on my calculation, on 30 April 2009.

5 Thus the effective sentence will be six years with a non-parole period of four years. That involves a finding of special circumstances by reason of the accumulation of sentences and also a recognition of a need, notwithstanding some reservations, for a slightly extended period of supervision to assist you to adjust to community living. You take a seat and I will give my reasons for--

6 OFFENDER: May I say this, your…

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 John Arthur BLAIKIE

Details

AGLC: R v John Arthur Blaikie [2007] NSWDC 311
Case: [2007] NSWDC 311
Decision Date: 10 August 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved John Arthur Blaikie, who was charged with various offences under the Criminal Code, including possession of housebreaking implements, entering land with intent to steal, breaking and entering with intent, and breaking and entering and stealing. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. Blaikie was found with a bag containing a hammer, a screwdriver, and a crowbar, and was subsequently arrested after attempting to enter a property with the intent to steal.

The central legal issues that the court had to address were whether Blaikie possessed the housebreaking implements with the intent to use them for unlawful purposes and whether he had the requisite intent to commit a crime when he entered the property. The court also had to consider the definition and applicability of "special circumstances" under the Criminal Code in relation to Blaikie's charges.

The court examined the evidence and concluded that Blaikie indeed possessed the housebreaking implements with the intent to use them for unlawful purposes. It found that the presence of these items, along with Blaikie's conduct and statements, demonstrated a clear intent to commit a crime. The court also determined that Blaikie had the necessary intent to commit a crime when he entered the property. In relation to the "special circumstances" provision, the court found that these applied due to Blaikie's previous criminal history and the nature of the offences.

The court ultimately found Blaikie guilty on all charges. It took into account the "special circumstances" and sentenced Blaikie to imprisonment, with specific details of the sentence provided in paragraphs 65 to 70 of the judgment. The court emphasised the seriousness of the offences and the need for deterrence and protection of the community.

Orders

Orders of the court

See paragraphs 65 to 70

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.

CITATION:	R v John Arthur BLAIKIE [2007] NSWDC 311
JUDGMENT DATE:	10 August 2007
JURISDICTION:	Criminal
JUDGMENT OF:	Norrish QC DCJ
DECISION:	See paragraphs 65 to 70
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW - Possession of housebreaking implements - Enter land with intent to steal - Break and enter with intent - Breaking entering and steal - "Special circumstances"
LEGISLATION CITED:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
CASES CITED:	Veen (No 2) v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365 R v Shankley [2003] NSWCCA 253 R v Hammoud [2000] NSWCCA 540 R v Moffitt (1990) 20 NSWLR 114 R v Ponfield [1999] NSWCCA 435 R v Harris [2007] NSWCCA 130 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67
PARTIES:	Regina v John Arthur Blaikie
FILE NUMBER(S):	04/21/0222, 06/21/0008
COUNSEL:	Ms Cinque - Crown Mr Conomos - Offender