R v Longmore
[2018] ACTSC 298
•29 October 2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Longmore |
Citation: | [2018] ACTSC 298 |
Hearing Date: | 29 October 2018 |
DecisionDate: | 29 October 2018 |
Before: | Elkaim J |
Decision: | See [16] |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – aggravated robbery – arson – driving while disqualified – burglary – theft – drive motor vehicle without consent – make off without payment |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) s 10 |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Matthew Longmore (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel Mr M Fernandez (Crown) Ms B Dunne (Offender) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid ACT (Offender) | |
File Numbers: | SCC 67 of 2018; 68 of 2018; 69 of 2018; 70 of 2018 |
ELKAIM J:
The offender has pleaded guilty to a number of charges, mostly involving motor vehicles, theft, burglary and an aggravated robbery. There is also a charge of arson of a motor vehicle.
The details of the offences are described in the Statement of Facts which forms part of Exhibit A.
Three of the charges were contained in an indictment filed on 18 June 2018. The indictment contained six counts. The pleas of guilty to the fourth, fifth and sixth counts were accepted in full satisfaction of the indictment. There are also 8 charges transferred from the Magistrates Court.
On 24 September 2017, the offender stole a Subaru Forester from an address in Rivett. Later in the day he put petrol into the vehicle but drove off without paying. He did the same on 30 September 2017. On 1 October 2017, the offender set fire to the Subaru.
On 2 October 2017, the offender and another man, Mr Rootsey, committed an aggravated robbery upon a McDonald’s restaurant in Conder. Part of the circumstances of the robbery included the robbers driving a Nissan 180 SX Coupe which had been stolen from a residence in Gordon. The offender was essentially the getaway driver but this does not lessen his involvement in the offence.
The Nissan was located a day later in a damaged state. It was a vehicle obviously close to the heart of its owner as described in the Victim Impact Statement which is part of Exhibit A.
The remaining offences concern stealing a Mitsubishi motor vehicle and entering the owner’s home as a trespasser and stealing the car keys as well as a mobile telephone. Exhibit B is a Victim Impact Statement from the owner of the Mitsubishi.
I have taken both statements into account and in particular their emphasis on the effects of the criminal conduct upon the victims personally.
I note here that I sentenced Mr Rootsey for his role in the aggravated robbery on 13 March 2018. Principles of parity are obviously relevant but, as conceded by counsel for the offender, Mr Rootsey’s subjective circumstances are very different to this offender’s.
The offender was born in 1995. He is of Aboriginal descent and is the youngest of five siblings. He had a positive upbringing and has a good relationship with his family. He is single and does not have any dependents.
The offender completed year eight. He left school early because he was a victim of bullying. His real problem has been with drug use. He has been a very heavy user of methamphetamines and I have no doubt that his use has been behind a lot of his criminal activity. He has been using drugs while in custody.
He already has a bad record and he committed these offences while under a Good Behaviour Order. If he does not become rehabilitated very soon he is going to be a long-term criminal. There is one glimmer of hope for him in the future which is that he has been accepted into a residential rehabilitation program beginning in January next year. I think it is vital that he attends this program. This does not mean that he should be let off in any lenient fashion for these offences, but rather that the sentencing objective should make allowance for him to attend the program.
The offender has been in custody for 359 days, which must be taken into account. It is also important, where there are so many different offences, to have regard to principles of totality. At the same time the victims of separate criminal sprees are entitled to feel that the offender is being punished particularly for the offences committed against that person. This means that there will be a degree of concurrency and accumulation which may not, at first sight appear logical, but has as its intent appropriate individual punishment married with totality.
In addition, I must take into account the objects and principles of sentencing as set out in the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT). Section 10 is normally applicable because it says a person should not be sent to prison unless as a last resort. That is not the case here. These crimes obviously attract a prison sentence.
It is also necessary for me to take into account the pleas of guilty. They were not made at the earliest opportunity but nevertheless they have had a utilitarian value. I have factored in a discount of about 15%.
I make the following orders:
(a)In relation to Count 4, dishonestly drive a motor vehicle (CC 2017/31371), the offender is sentenced to 9 months’ imprisonment commencing on 4 November 2017 and ending on 3 August 2018.
(b)In relation to Count 5, arson (CC 2017/480), the offender is sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment commencing on 4 November 2017 and ending on 3 February 2019.
(c)In relation to Count 6, aggravated robbery (CC 2017/10978), the offender is sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment commencing on 4 November 2017 and ending on 3 November 2020.
(d)In relation to the offence of burglary (CC 2017/10979), the offender is sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment commencing on 3 August 2020 and ending on 2 February 2021.
(e)In relation to the offence of theft (CC 2017/10981), the offender is sentence to 6 months’ imprisonment commencing on 3 August 2020 and ending on 2 February 2021.
(f)In relation to the offence of drive motor vehicle without consent (CC 2017/10982), the offender is sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment commencing on 3 August 2020 and ending on 2 February 2021.
(g)In relation to the offence of driving while disqualified (CC 2018/00474), the offender is sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment commencing on 3 August 2020 and ending on 2 February 2021. The offender is disqualified from driving for a period of 24 months to commence on from 14 January 2019.
(h)In relation to the offence of driving while disqualified (CC 2018/00477), the offender is sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment commencing on 3 August 2020 and ending on 2 February 2021. The same disqualification applies.
(i)In relation to the offence of driving while disqualified (CC 2018/00479), the offender is sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment commencing on 3 August 2020 and ending on 2 February 2021. The same disqualification applies.
(j)In relation to the offence of make off without payment (CC 2018/00473), the offender is sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment commencing on 1 February 2021 and ending on 30 April 2021.
(k)In relation to the offence of make off without payment (CC 2018/00476), the offender is sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment commencing on 1 February 2021 and ending on 30 April 2021.
(l)The total sentence is 3 years 5 months and 27 days starting on 4 November 2017 and ending on 30 April 2021.
(m)The above sentence is suspended on 14 January 2019 on the condition that the offender enter into a good behaviour order for 2 years and 6 months with core conditions including that he accept the supervision of the director of corrective services for such time as the director thinks appropriate and that he attends the residential rehabilitation facility at Triple Care Farm from 14 January 2019.
| I certify that the preceding sixteen [16] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Elkaim. Associate: Date: |
2
0
1