R v John (No 3)
[2019] ACTSC 367
•11 September 2019
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v John (No 3) |
Citation: | [2019] ACTSC 367 |
Hearing Date: | 11 September 2019 |
DecisionDate: | 11 September 2019 |
Before: | Burns J |
Decision: | See [9]–[15] |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Resentence – breach of Community Service Order – breach of Good Behaviour Order – consideration of offender’s mental health |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Hayley John (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel S Jerome (Crown) Self-represented (Offender) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Self-represented (Offender) | |
File Number(s): | SCC 17 of 2016 |
BURNS J:
On 13 July 2017, Ms Hayley John was sentenced to three years' imprisonment, suspended on 10 April 2018 upon her entering into a Good Behaviour Order for a period of three years. It was a condition of the Good Behaviour Order that she would accept supervision for a period of two years, and would also perform 80 hours of community service work by 10 April 2019; that is within 12 months from the date from which she was to be released from custody.
Ms John was brought before the Court for a breach of the obligations of her Community Service Order on 6 December 2018. At that time, of course, the 12 month period, which had been granted by Refshauge J to complete the 80 hours of community service, had not expired. McWilliam AJ, on 6 December 2018, effectively made no orders. She noted that there had been a breach of the orders made by Refshauge J with regard to the Community Service Order, but simply confirmed the orders that had been made by his Honour on 13 July 2017. In effect, her Honour granted the applicant until April 2019 to complete the Community Service Order.
Ms John has not completed the Community Service Order, and in fact there is still some 67 hours, I believe, of community service outstanding. In addition to which, she has also breached the supervision requirement of the Good Behaviour Order which was imposed as part of the suspended sentence. As the Crown correctly pointed out, I have two options in relation to dealing with this matter. I could either impose the remaining suspended sentences of imprisonment which were imposed by Refshauge J, or alternatively, re-sentence Ms John.
I have no option but to cancel the Good Behaviour Orders that were made by Refshauge J. In my opinion, the appropriate way to proceed in this case is to cancel the Good Behaviour Orders made by Refshauge J, and to re-sentence Ms John.
I take into account the material which has now been put before me by Ms John. I am satisfied that for some time Ms John has suffered from significant anxiety and depression. This has been established by a report which has been put before me from a psychologist. She is now being treated for that condition and also has family support.
I note that contemporaneously at the time when she was not reporting for supervision and not reporting for community service, Ms John had engaged in email communications with her Corrections Officer to the effect that she was having great difficulty. That appears to be significantly corroborated by the report which has been provided from the psychologist.
I note that the orders made by Refshauge J were largely directed towards the rehabilitation of Ms John, particularly insofar as it permitted a significant period of the sentences of imprisonment to be suspended, and for there to be a
Good Behaviour Order which was directed towards assisting Ms John. Of course, there was already a degree of punishment imposed by the fact that Ms John served a period of full-time custody prior to being released pursuant to the orders that were made by Refshauge J.
I note that Ms John has not committed any further offences since she was released from custody, and indeed I note that the offences upon which she was sentenced by Refshauge J occurred some four years ago. I also take into account the fact that
Ms John is now employed.
Resentence
I propose to re-impose sentences of imprisonment and to immediately suspend those sentences, and impose a Good Behaviour Order which will extend for slightly longer than that which was imposed by Refshauge J, but will contain no condition relating to either supervision or a Community Service Order.
So with respect to all matters, the Good Behaviour Orders are cancelled, and I will resentence.
On charge number CC15/7949, you will be sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment commencing today, 11 September 2019, and expiring on 10 September 2020.
On the following charges:
· XO16/30957, you are sentenced to six months' imprisonment;
· XO16/30958, you are sentenced to eight months' imprisonment;
· XO16/30959, you are sentenced to six months' imprisonment; and
· CC15/7241, you are sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment.
Each of those sentences will commence on 11 September 2019.
Finally, with regard to CC15/7932, you will be sentenced to nine months' imprisonment commencing on 10 July 2020 and expiring on 9 April 2021. There will be a Good Behaviour Order for a period of two years commencing on 11 September 2019 and expiring on 10 September 2021, which will be confined to the core conditions.
Now, Ms John, I have taken into account the period that you have already served both in terms of custody and under the Good Behaviour Orders that were imposed by Refshauge J. I have re-sentenced you to a term of imprisonment, effectively commencing today, and expiring on 9 April 2021. I have imposed a two year
Good Behaviour Order from today, which simply requires that you not commit any further offences for that period.
You are no longer subject to supervision, and I have done away with the remaining hours of community service, so that if you simply ensure that you do not commit any further offences, then there is no reason why you should serve any further period of imprisonment. Of course, if you commit further offences, then that would be a very good reason why these orders should be commuted into full-time terms of imprisonment.
| I certify that the preceding fifteen [15] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Burns. Associate: Date: |
0
0
0