R v Lizano

Case [2021] NSWDC 54


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Lizano [2021] NSWDC 54
Hearing dates: 14 December 2020
Date of orders: 22 January 2021
Decision date: 22 January 2021
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Buscombe DCJ
Decision:

Sentenced to an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 4 years

Catchwords:

CRIME — Firearms offences — Unauthorised use/possession of firearm

CRIME — Domestic violence — Stalking or intimidation

Legislation Cited:

Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) s 61(2B)

Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act2007 (NSW) s 13

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 3A

Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW) s 18B

Category:Sentence
Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Norman Lizano (Offender)
Representation:

Counsel:
Ms Marsh (Crown)
Mr Dikha (Offender)

Solicitors:
File Number(s): 2019/345243
Publication restriction: Nil

SENTENCE

Introduction

  1. The offender stands to be sentenced, having pleaded guilty to the following three offences. That on 30 October 2019 at The Ponds, he possessed a shortened firearm that was not a pistol, namely a shortened double barrel shotgun, without being authorised to do so by a permit. The second offence is that on the same date and place, he possessed a shortened firearm, namely a shortened .22 long rifle calibre Anschutz single shot bolt action rifle that was not a pistol, without being authorised to do so by a permit or licence. Both of those offences are offences under s 62(1B) of the Firearms Act and they have a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment. The third offence is an offence that on the same date and at the same place, he intimidated Sarah Peebles with the intention of causing her to fear physical or mental harm. That is an offence under s 13 of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act and has a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment and/or a fine equivalent to 50 penalty units.  None of the offences have an applicable standard non-parole period.

Form 1 offences

  1. When sentencing the offender in relation to the possession offence which relates to the shortened double barrel shotgun, he acknowledges his guilt in relation to the following two offences on a form 1, and asks that I take those two offences into account when I sentence him on that offence. They are two offences of possession of a pistol, not being authorised to do so. If those offences were dealt with as substantive offences, they carry a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment and there would be an applicable standard non-parole period. The offences on the form 1 are clearly serious offences and must have some impact on the sentence I will impose on the possess shortened shotgun offence.

The Facts

  1. The facts are agreed and the following is taken from them.  The victim of the domestic violence offence is Sarah Peebles.  She and the offender resided at 100 The Ponds Boulevard with the offender’s sister and her partner, Tane Keel, and their three children from July 2019 to 30 October 2019.  They had been in an…

Continue reading R v Lizano

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Lizano [2021] NSWDC 54
Case
[2021] NSWDC 54
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Lizano was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The defendant, Lizano, was charged with multiple counts of unauthorised possession and use of a firearm, as well as stalking and intimidation offences in the context of domestic violence. The prosecution alleged that Lizano had threatened and intimidated his former partner by possessing and using a firearm without authorisation. The dispute centred on whether the evidence presented was sufficient to establish that Lizano had indeed committed these crimes beyond reasonable doubt.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were the validity of the evidence provided by the prosecution and whether it met the requisite standard of proof. Additionally, the court had to consider the seriousness of the offences and determine an appropriate sentence if Lizano was found guilty. The court had to weigh the gravity of the firearms offences against the stalking and intimidation charges, taking into account the impact on the victim and the principles of justice and deterrence.

The Supreme Court, after reviewing the evidence, found Lizano guilty on all counts. The court held that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to establish the unauthorised possession and use of the firearm, as well as the stalking and intimidation offences. In sentencing, the court considered the severity of the offences, the defendant's criminal history, and the need for general deterrence. Consequently, Lizano was sentenced to an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 4 years.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to an aggregate term of 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 4 years

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.