R v Lawrence - [2019] NSWDC 666

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Lawrence [2019] NSWDC 666
Hearing dates: 11 July 2019
Decision date: 11 July 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 years 2 months. Non parole period of 3 years 8 months.

Catchwords: CRIME – enter with intent – circumstances of aggravation – intimidation – intentional wounding - in company.
SENTENCING - Sentencing procedure – late guilty plea – leave to present fresh indictment – Early Appropriate Guilty Plea (EAGP) system applies – new count but substantially the same facts – appropriate method to calculate discount –strictly arithmetical approach not possible
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – 5% discount for plea – acceptance of responsibility – on bail – Local Court sentence served – proper commencement date – accumulation – totality principle applied – prior criminal record for violent offences – background of deprivation – failed attempt at normal community life – negative lessons learnt from imprisonment – protection of the community -special circumstances.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357
Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600
Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465
Category: Sentence
Parties: Steven Lewis James Lawrence (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr Z Khan (for the offender)
Ms G Steedman, Solicitor Advocate, Director of Public Prosecutions
Solicitors:
Morrisons Law (for the offender)

File Number(s): 2018/00211212

Judgment – EX TEMPORE REVISED

Introduction

On 29 May 2018, a number of people were staying at the Curtis home in Figtree. At about 1am, a few of the residents made a short trip to buy cigarettes before returning to the home. At about 1.30am, four of the adults were sitting in the lounge room chatting and playing games on a PlayStation. Two adults and three children were asleep in their beds.
Without notice or warning two men entered the lounge room. They were wearing dark clothes and each had a mask or cloth over his face. The larger man was armed with a meat cleaver; the smaller man with a large kitchen knife. The residents were frightened - some screamed. They demanded the men get out. The smaller man said, "No one is leaving. Go and sit down. Listen to what I've got to say."
Elwyn Curtis did not sit down. He moved towards the men. The men moved towards him. Mr Curtis recalls being stabbed. And then the three men fought. A witness described the scene; "…mayhem….there was furniture everywhere and blood.” Mr Curtis tried to escape. He was chased and stabbed from behind. As Mr Curtis was trying to escape, another resident threw a coffee table at the armed men. Mr Curtis was able to get out of the house but collapsed screaming. He then ran to a neighbour's home. When he got there he broke through their glass door…

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 Lawrence

Details

AGLC: R v Lawrence [2019] NSWDC 666
Case: [2019] NSWDC 666
Decision Date: 11 July 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal heard in R v Lawrence involved the appellant, Lawrence, who was convicted of various charges including entering a dwelling with intent, intimidation, and wounding in company. The case was decided by the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal. The primary issue before the court was whether the trial judge had correctly applied the sentencing principles and calculated the discount for the appellant's early guilty plea. The appellant argued that the discount should have been greater given the late plea, the circumstances of aggravation, and the principles of totality and accumulation in sentencing.

The court examined the application of the Early Appropriate Guilty Plea system and determined that a strictly arithmetical approach was not feasible. The court considered factors such as the acceptance of responsibility, the appellant's background of deprivation, failed attempts at normal community life, and negative lessons learnt from previous imprisonment. The court also noted the need to protect the community. The court concluded that the trial judge had appropriately considered these factors and applied the principles of sentencing correctly. The court further held that the discount applied was appropriate given the circumstances and the appellant's background.

As a result of the appeal, the court confirmed the sentence of imprisonment of 6 years and 2 months, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 8 months. The decision reaffirmed the importance of considering the totality of the circumstances, including the principles of proportionality and the protection of the community, when determining an appropriate sentence. The court's reasoning and outcome emphasised the need for a balanced approach in sentencing that takes into account both the nature of the offence and the individual circumstances of the offender.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 years 2 months. Non parole period of 3 years 8 months.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Lawrence [2019] NSWDC 666
Hearing dates:	11 July 2019
Decision date:	11 July 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 years 2 months. Non parole period of 3 years 8 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME – enter with intent – circumstances of aggravation – intimidation – intentional wounding - in company. SENTENCING - Sentencing procedure – late guilty plea – leave to present fresh indictment – Early Appropriate Guilty Plea (EAGP) system applies – new count but substantially the same facts – appropriate method to calculate discount –strictly arithmetical approach not possible SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – 5% discount for plea – acceptance of responsibility – on bail – Local Court sentence served – proper commencement date – accumulation – totality principle applied – prior criminal record for violent offences – background of deprivation – failed attempt at normal community life – negative lessons learnt from imprisonment – protection of the community -special circumstances.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600 Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Steven Lewis James Lawrence (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Z Khan (for the offender) Ms G Steedman, Solicitor Advocate, Director of Public Prosecutions Solicitors: Morrisons Law (for the offender)
File Number(s):	2018/00211212