District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Love [2023] NSWDC 609 Hearing dates: 4 October 2023 Date of orders: 4 October 2023 Decision date: 04 October 2023 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Haesler SC DCJ Decision: Aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 9 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 6 years and 1 month
Catchwords: CRIME — Apprehended violence orders — Contravene apprehended violence order
CRIME — Drug offences — Supply prohibited drug — Less than commercial quantity of methylamphetamine
CRIME — Firearm offences — Possess pistol — Possess ammunition — Possess pistol contrary to firearms prohibition order
CRIME — Property offences — Break and enter with intent to commit serious indictable — Circumstances of aggravation
CRIME — Violent offences — Aggravated robbery — In company — With corporal violence — Dangerous weapon
SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Home of victim — In company — Record of previous convictions
SENTENCING — Guidelines for sentencing — Role of guidelines — Application of guideline judgment
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty
SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Parity — Form 1 offences — Role of offender — Objective seriousness
SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Instinctive synthesis
SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Drug addiction — Offender’s impoverished background — Impact of multiple traumas — Special circumstances — Totality
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes(Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
DrugMisuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Attorney General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518; (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 249 CLR 571
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Beattie [2017] NSWCCA 301
Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh(a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41
Green v The Queen [2011] HCA 49; (2011) 244 CLR 462
Harrigan v R [2005] NSWCCA 449
Magaming v The Queen [2013] HCA 40; (2013) 252 CLR 381
Marinellis v R [2006] NSWCCA 307
Mill v The Queen [1988] HCA 70; (1988) 166 CLR 59
Postiglione v The Queen [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295
R v Chamberlain, unreported NSWDC 25 May 2022
R v Clinch (1994) 72 A Crim R 301
R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; (1999) 46 NSWLR 346; (1999) 106 A Crim R 149
R v Herring (1956) 73 WN (NSW) 203
R v Kominkovski [2023] NSWDC 511
R v Pangallo (1991) 56 A Crim R 441
R…
Continue reading R v Love
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Love [2023] NSWDC 609
- Case
- [2023] NSWDC 609
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to address several legal issues, including the principles of sentencing for multiple offences, the application of sentencing guidelines, and the consideration of both aggravating and mitigating factors. Specifically, the court had to balance the objective seriousness of the crimes with Love's personal circumstances, such as his background and drug addiction. Additionally, the court needed to ensure that the sentence was proportionate to the offences committed, particularly given the presence of an apprehended violence order, which was deliberately contravened.
In delivering the judgment, the court meticulously analysed each offence, assessing the role Love played and the level of culpability. It considered the totality of his criminal conduct and the impact of his actions on the victims and the community. The court found that the aggregate sentence of imprisonment, which included a non-parole period, was necessary to reflect the seriousness of Love's crimes and to protect the public. The court also acknowledged Love's plea of guilty and his drug addiction as mitigating factors, but these were weighed against the aggravating factors, such as the presence of a dangerous weapon and the fact that the offences were committed in company.
The final orders of the court upheld the original sentence, recognising the severity of Love's criminal conduct and the need for deterrence and protection of the community. The aggregate sentence of imprisonment, with a specified non-parole period, was deemed appropriate to address the multiple and serious nature of the offences committed by Love.
Orders
Orders of the court
Aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 9 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 6 years and 1 month
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.