Legal Research
Cases
R v Johnson

R v Johnson

Case [2004] NSWCCA 446 8 December 2004

Criminal Liability

Mens Rea & Intention

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

CITATION: R v JOHNSON [2004] NSWCCA 446 revised - 17/02/2005

FILE NUMBER(S):
60091/04

HEARING DATE(S): 23 June 2004

JUDGMENT DATE: 08/12/2004

PARTIES:
Regina
Jason Allan Johnson

JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA Levine J Hulme J

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 03/31/1096

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: English DCJ

COUNSEL:
Crown: D Woodburne
Appellant: P Strickland

SOLICITORS:
Crown: S Kavanagh
Appellant: S O'Connor

CATCHWORDS:

LEGISLATION CITED:

DECISION:
Leave to appeal is granted
Appeal is allowed
Sentence imposed by Judge English on 29 August 2003 is quashed
The Applicant is sentenced to imprisonment for a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months commencing on 3 May 2003 and a balance of term of 2 years during which time the Applicant shall be eligible for parole
Specify the date on which the Applicant shall be eligible for parole to be 3 November 2005

JUDGMENT:

- 6 -

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL

60091/04
GILES JA
LEVINE J
HULME J

Wednesday, 8 December 2004

R v Jason Allan JOHNSON

Judgment

GILES JA: I have had the advantage of reading the reasons of Hulme J in draft. For the reasons his Honour gives, the sentence was excessive. As his Honour describes, there are some circumstances warranting a sentence above the range in R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346, and some warranting a sentence below the range. In my opinion, in weighing up all the circumstances and with regard on re-sentencing to the applicant’s progress since August 2003, the sentence at which his Honour arrives is appropriate. I agree with the orders proposed.
LEVINE J: I agree with Hulme J.
HULME J: On 22 August 2003 this Applicant for leave to appeal pleaded guilty to a charge under s97(2) of the Crimes Act alleging that on 3 May 2003 when armed with a dangerous weapon namely a power head spear gun robbed Deborah Jordan of $502.50 the property of two persons trading as “The Oasis Service Station”. The plea had first been entered in the Local Court a month after the offence was committed.
On 29 August 2003 Judge English sentenced the Applicant to a term of imprisonment including a non-parole period of 6 years commencing on 3 May 2003 and a further period of 3 years.
The circumstances of the offence fall within a short compass. At about 8.15pm on 3 May 2003 the Applicant and a pillion passenger rode an unregistered motor cycle to the service station, parking at the rear. The Applicant walked to the front of the service station wearing a full faced helmet and dust coat. He approached a female service station attendant, Deborah, at a public phone adjacent to the entrance doors, pulled back his coat to reveal the butt of the weapon protruding from his pants and demanded money. Both then entered the service station walking to the counter.
At about this time a second female attendant entered from a back room and was informed…

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 Johnson

Details

AGLC: R v Johnson [2004] NSWCCA 446
Case: [2004] NSWCCA 446
Decision Date: 8 December 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Johnson was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the defendant, Johnson, was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Johnson claimed self-defence in response to the alleged assault by the complainant. The central issue before the court was whether Johnson’s actions were justified as self-defence or if they amounted to an unlawful assault.

The court examined the elements required to establish self-defence, including whether Johnson genuinely believed that an assault was imminent, and whether the force used was reasonable in the circumstances. The court also considered the nature and extent of the injuries inflicted by Johnson and whether they were proportionate to the perceived threat.

After evaluating the evidence presented, the court concluded that Johnson’s belief in the necessity of self-defence was reasonable, and the force used was proportionate to the perceived threat. The court found that Johnson had acted in self-defence and acquitted him of the charge. The court emphasised the importance of the proportionality of the force used and the subjective belief of the accused at the time of the incident.

The final orders of the court were to acquit Johnson of the charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The court also noted the importance of the principles of self-defence in ensuring that individuals can protect themselves when faced with a genuine threat.

Orders