District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Leary; R v Williams [2024] NSWDC 554 Hearing dates: 18/9/24 Date of orders: 18/9/24 Decision date: 18 September 2024 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Bourke SC DCJ Decision: WILLIAMS:
Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 1 years 8 months with a NPP of 13 months (6/10/23-5/11/24). I find special circumstances.
Indicatives (25 percent discount taken into account):
Seq 3 – 1 year 7 months (Form 1 taken into account).
Seq 4 – 10 months.
LEARY:
Convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 18 months with a NPP of 1 year (18/3/24-17/3/25). I find special circumstances.
Form 1 taken into account.
Catchwords: Crime – Sentence – Use offensive weapon with intent to intimidate – Assault occasioning actual bodily harm
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Category: Sentence Parties: NSW DPP – Crown
Cameron Charles Leary – Offender
Eleyah Williams - OffenderRepresentation: Ms Hwang for Crown
Mr Voros for Leary
Mr Skinner for Williams
File Number(s): 23/217838, 23/217851
remarks on sentence
-
The offenders, Ms Eleyah Williams and Mr Cameron Leary are before the Court for sentence.
-
Ms Williams, in relation to two offences, firstly an offence of using an offensive weapon with intent to commit an indictable offence of intimidation, that being an offence under s 33B(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900, which carries a maximum penalty of 12 years imprisonment. Also, in sentencing for that offence, she asks that I take into account an offence of larceny, which is on a Form 1 document, and I will do that. Secondly, she is to be sentenced for an offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm under s 59(1) of the Crimes Act, which carries a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.
-
Mr Leary, however, is to be sentenced in relation only to one offence, that being the use of an offensive weapon with intent to commit an indictable offence of intimidation. The maximum penalty for that offence, as I have said, is 12 years’ imprisonment. And he asks that in sentencing him for that offence, I take into account, on a Form 1 document, an offence of larceny, and I will take that course.
-
The maximum penalty for the relevant offences is, of course, an important guidepost in the sentencing exercise, to which I have had appropriate regard.
-
Each of the offenders pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and, therefore, are entitled to and will be given a 25% discount, by reason of the utilitarian value of those pleas of guilty.
FACTS
-
The facts are agreed in each case, and are in summary as follows. The offender, Ms Williams, and Mr Leary, the co-offender, had been in a relationship, and the victim of the offences in this matter was in a relationship with Ms Williams immediately prior…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Leary; R v Williams and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2024] NSWDC 554
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues the court had to resolve included the assessment of the appropriate penalty for each defendant, taking into account the gravity of their respective crimes, the role each played in the events, and any mitigating factors. The court had to determine whether special circumstances existed that warranted a departure from the standard sentencing guidelines, and if so, the extent of such departure. Additionally, the court had to consider the principles of totality, ensuring that the aggregate sentence did not unduly punish the defendants for overlapping conduct.
In delivering the judgment, the court meticulously evaluated the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. It found that special circumstances did apply, justifying a departure from the usual sentencing norms. The court considered the defendants' backgrounds, their roles in the commission of the crimes, and the impact of their actions on the victims. After a detailed analysis, the court determined that Williams should receive an aggregate term of imprisonment of 1 year and 8 months, with a non-parole period of 13 months, and Leary should receive a term of imprisonment of 18 months, with a non-parole period of 1 year. The court found that these sentences reflected the seriousness of the offences while also considering the mitigating factors.
The court's final orders were that Williams be sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 1 year and 8 months with a non-parole period of 13 months, and Leary be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 18 months with a non-parole period of 1 year. Both sentences were subject to the special circumstances identified by the court.
Orders
Orders of the court
WILLIAMS:
Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 1 years 8 months with a NPP of 13 months (6/10/23-5/11/24). I find special circumstances.
Indicatives (25 percent discount taken into account):
Seq 3 – 1 year 7 months (Form 1 taken into account).
Seq 4 – 10 months.
LEARY:
Convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 18 months with a NPP of 1 year (18/3/24-17/3/25). I find special circumstances.
Form 1 taken into account.
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.