R v Joseph Ennis - [2014] ACTSC 369

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Joseph Ennis
Citation:	[2014] ACTSC 369
Hearing Date(s):	24 September 2014, 4 November 2014
DecisionDate:	4 November 2014
Before:	Refshauge J
Decision:	1. It be declared that Joseph Ennis has breached the Good behaviour order imposed by Nield AJ on 17 April 2012. 2. Under s 108 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), the Order be amended by: (a) extending the period of good behaviour to a further period of twelve months, to end on 3 November 2015; (b) extending the number of hours of community service work to one hundred and eight hours, to be completed within twelve months from 4 November 2014; and (c) requiring Joseph Ennis to be subject to supervision by the Director-General, or her delegate, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him for twelve months from 4 November 2014. 3. It be noted that Joseph Ennis has already performed eight hours of community service work. 4. Joseph Ennis be directed to report to ACT Corrective Services at Eclipse House, London Circuit, Canberra City by 4:00 pm on 4 November 2014, for the purpose of arranging ongoing supervision and community service.
Category:	Principal Judgment
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Judgment and Punishment – Sentencing – Re-sentencing – Breach of Good Behaviour Order – Failure to complete community service condition to Good Behaviour Order
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 24 Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), s 108
Cases Cited:	Channon v The Queen (1978) 33 FLR 433 Hogan v Hinch (2011) 263 CLR 506 R v Ennis (Unreported, ACTSC, Nield AJ, 17 April 2012) R v Govinden (1999) 106 A Crim R 314 Saga v Reid [2010] ACTSC 59
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Joseph Ennis (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel Mr K Lee (Crown) Ms K McCann (Offender)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Ben Aulich & Associates (Offender)
File Number(s):	SCC 7 of 2011

Refshauge J:

Despite the considerable contribution that illicit drug use makes to criminality in the community, alcohol remains a problem for those addicted to it. Alcohol abuse remains a very significant source of crime and leads the addict to unhealthy and anti-social behaviour and situations.

This is the situation of Joseph Ennis, who appears before me because of his breach of community service condition to a good behaviour order.

The offence and the sentence

On 17 April 2012, Mr Ennis was convicted by Nield AJ of the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. That offence, contrary to s 24 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), attracts a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.

His Honour, in the reasons for sentence (R v Ennis (Unreported, ACTSC, Nield AJ, 17 April 2012)) set out the facts of the offence. I do not need to repeat them, save to say that it was an offence of domestic violence where both Mr Ennis and his partner were drunk and fought “over money”. Mr Ennis’…

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 Joseph Ennis

Details

AGLC: R v Joseph Ennis [2014] ACTSC 369
Case: [2014] ACTSC 369
Decision Date: 4 November 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Joseph Ennis was before the court for a matter concerning the breach of a Good Behaviour Order. The dispute arose from Ennis's failure to complete the community service condition attached to the Good Behaviour Order that was imposed by Nield AJ on 17 April 2012. The court was required to determine whether Ennis had indeed breached the order and, if so, what the appropriate consequences should be.

The legal issues that the court needed to address included whether the evidence presented was sufficient to establish a breach of the Good Behaviour Order, and if so, what the appropriate sentence should be under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT). The court had to consider the nature and extent of the breach, as well as the principles of sentencing and the circumstances of the case.

In its reasoning, the court found that the evidence clearly demonstrated that Ennis had breached the Good Behaviour Order by failing to complete the required community service. The court then proceeded to amend the order by extending the period of good behaviour, increasing the number of hours of community service, and requiring Ennis to be supervised by the Director-General or their delegate. The court also noted that Ennis had already completed eight hours of community service and directed him to report to ACT Corrective Services for further arrangements.

The court's final orders included a declaration that Ennis had breached the Good Behaviour Order, an amendment of the order to extend the good behaviour period and community service hours, and a direction for Ennis to report to ACT Corrective Services for supervision and to continue his community service.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. It be declared that Joseph Ennis has breached the Good behaviour order imposed by Nield AJ on 17 April 2012.

2. Under s 108 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), the Order be amended by:

(a) extending the period of good behaviour to a further period of twelve months, to end on 3 November 2015;

(b) extending the number of hours of community service work to one hundred and eight hours, to be completed within twelve months from 4 November 2014; and

(c) requiring Joseph Ennis to be subject to supervision by the Director-General, or her delegate, and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him for twelve months from 4 November 2014.

3. It be noted that Joseph Ennis has already performed eight hours of community service work.

4. Joseph Ennis be directed to report to ACT Corrective Services at Eclipse House, London Circuit, Canberra City by 4:00 pm on 4 November 2014, for the purpose of arranging ongoing supervision and community service.

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.