That Mr Mathews’ conviction for the offence of burglary on
1 June 2020 be confirmed.
2.
For that offence, Mr Mathews be sentenced to 18 months’
imprisonment, to commence on 1 June 202.
3.
That Mr Mathews’ conviction for theft of property on 1 June
2020 be confirmed.
4.
For that offence, Mr Mathews be sentenced to 10 months’
imprisonment, to commence on 30 November 2021.
5.
That Mr Mathews be found to have breached the Good Behaviour Order made on 23 January 2020.
6.
For that breach, the Good Behaviour Order be cancelled, and the conviction of the offence of damaging property be confirmed.
7.
For that offence, Mr Mathews be sentenced to three
month’s imprisonment, to commence on 31 January 2022.
8.
A Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, under s 12A of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), be made for 1 year 3 months and 18 days, in respect of Mr Mathews, for the primary offence of burglary, from 14 December 2020 until 31 March 2022.
9.
The Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order be extended to the offences of theft on 1 June 2020 and damaging property on 4 April 2019, both being associated offences of the primary offence.
10.
The convictions and sentences for the primary offences and the associated offences that have been confirmed and imposed, be incorporated into the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, for the custodial part of the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order.
11.
The total sentence of 22 months, being the sentence for the primary offence and associated offences, be suspended from today, 14 December 2020, until 31 March 2022, under s 80W of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT).
12.
For the treatment and supervision part of the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, Mr Mathews be required to comply with the core conditions set out in s 80Y of the
Order, including such case management and programs as may be required by the Treatment Order Team from time to time, or by order of the Court, including as to counselling, medical treatment, urinalysis or such other treatment or programs as may be required from time to time.
13.
Mr Mathews be directed to comply with any directions that the Court may make from time to time about attendance at Court in person or by electronic means.
14.
Mr Mathews be directed to attend Court on 18 December 2020 at 11:30 am.
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – burglary – theft – breach of good behaviour order – prospects of rehabilitation – meaning of sentencing practice – drug and alcohol
[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 Mathews
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Mathews [2020] ACTSC 364
Case
[2020] ACTSC 364
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The matter was heard before Refshauge AJ in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. Joshua James Mathews was convicted of burglary and theft, and he sought a referral to the Drug and Alcohol Sentencing List. The court confirmed the convictions and imposed sentences, as well as cancelling the Good Behaviour Order and confirming the conviction for damaging property. It also made a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, which was extended to the associated offences, and suspended the total sentence of 22 months, being the sentence for the primary offence and associated offences, until 31 March 2022.
The court was required to consider the seriousness of the offences, the offender’s criminal history, the principles of sentencing, and the purposes of sentencing in determining the appropriate sentence. The court also had to consider whether a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order was appropriate for the offender.
The court found that the offences were serious, particularly because they were committed while the offender was on conditional liberty. The court also found that the offender had a significant criminal history and had been in and out of custody since his arrest. The court considered the purposes of sentencing, including punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation, and found that a sentence of imprisonment was appropriate. However, the court also found that a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order was appropriate because the offender was dependent on illicit drugs and had shown some commitment to reform. The court suspended the sentence and made a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order for 1 year 3 months and 18 days, which was extended to the associated offences.