R v Meehan, Taris - [2008] NSWDC 334

CITATION: R v Meehan, Taris [2008] NSWDC 334

HEARING DATE(S): 13/11/2008

JUDGMENT DATE:
5 December 2008

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Nicholson SC DCJ

DECISION: Pursuant to S.166 of Crimes Procedure Act Knowingly contravene prohibition or restriction specified in an ADVO:
Convicted.
Sentence to a fixed term of 18 months imprisonment to date from the 9th September 2007 and expiring on the 8th March 2009.
Aggravated Break and Enter: (Committed for sentence)
Convicted.
Sentence to a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months to date from the 9th December 2008 and expiring on the 8th June 2012. Balance of term of 1 year and 9 months expiring on the 8th March 2014.
I find special circumstances.
S166 Matters- Maliciously wound a person and Maliciously destroy/damage property: (Back-up charges)
S.166 matters dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal Law - aggravated B & E and commit malicious wounding - standard non parole period offence - s.166 matter - contravene apprehended domestic violence order - Form 1 matter malicious damage to motor vehicle - ex boyfriend - breaks and enters ex girlfriend's home - occupants asleep - armed with two iron bars and two knives - breaks window with bar and enters - assaults ex girlfriends son - strikes and stabs new boyfriend - five discreet injury sites - worst case of contravene apprehended domestic violence order - occasions substantial malicious damage to new boyfriends car - 29 year old single male - mental health issues - otherwise reasonable subjective circumstances - early guilty plea - full cooperation with police - standard non parole period not imposed - special circumstances found

LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Procedure Act

CASES CITED: R v Gladue (1999) 1SCR 688 [80]
R v Cuthbert (1967) 2 NSWR 329
R v Rushby (1977) NSWLR 597
R v Hayes [1984] 1 NSWLR 740

PARTIES: Regina
Taris Meehan

FILE NUMBER(S): 2008/11/1202

COUNSEL: Defence: J. Nader

SOLICITORS: Crown: Mr Greg Coles

JUDGMENT

1. Gregory Glass is a forty-year-old father of an eleven-year-old daughter. In September of 2007 he was in what he believed were the early days of a new relationship with Angela Sponza. Both shared an interest in physical fitness. Glass had been running triathlons for fourteen years. He knew Ms Sponza had been receiving harassing calls on both her house land- line and mobile phones from an ex-boyfriend, Taris. There was an AVO in existence requiring Taris Meehan not to harass Ms Sponza, not to go within 100 yards of her premises and not to assault, molest or otherwise interfere with Ms Sponza or any other person with whom she had a domestic relationship.

2. On 8 September, Glass and his daughter were sleeping over at Ms Sponza’s. Also in the house that night and following morning were one of her two daughters, her son and his friend Daniel and of course Ms Sponza herself. At 7am on 9 September in circumstances that I will come to in more detail shortly, Taris Meehan broke and entered into the dwelling of Ms Sponza knowing she…

Grounds of appeal

[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 Meehan, Taris

Details

AGLC: R v Meehan, Taris [2008] NSWDC 334
Case: [2008] NSWDC 334
Decision Date: 5 December 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Meehan, Taris, the defendant was convicted on several charges including the contravention of an apprehended domestic violence order, aggravated break and enter with the commission of malicious wounding, and malicious damage to property. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The defendant, a 29-year-old single male with a history of mental health issues, broke into his ex-girlfriend's residence while she and her son were asleep. Armed with two iron bars and two knives, the defendant broke a window to gain entry, assaulted the ex-girlfriend's son, and stabbed the woman's new boyfriend, causing multiple injuries. The defendant also caused substantial damage to the new boyfriend's car. The court had to determine whether the defendant's actions constituted a contravention of the apprehended domestic violence order, and whether the break and enter was aggravated by the commission of malicious wounding.

The legal issues before the court involved the application of the standard non-parole period under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, and whether special circumstances existed that warranted a departure from this standard. The court considered the defendant's early guilty plea, full cooperation with police, and otherwise reasonable subjective circumstances, alongside his mental health issues, to determine if a special circumstances exception applied. The court needed to balance these factors against the gravity of the offences, which included serious violence and property damage, to arrive at an appropriate sentence.

The court found that while the standard non-parole period for the aggravated break and enter offence would typically be three years and six months, special circumstances were present due to the defendant's mental health issues and his otherwise reasonable subjective circumstances. Consequently, the court imposed a non-parole period of three years and six months, but the balance of the term was set at one year and nine months. For the contravention of the apprehended domestic violence order, the court sentenced the defendant to a fixed term of 18 months, with the sentence to run concurrently with the sentence for the aggravated break and enter offence. The court's decision recognised the seriousness of the offences but also took into account mitigating factors in determining the appropriate sentence.

Orders

Orders of the court

Pursuant to S.166 of Crimes Procedure Act Knowingly contravene prohibition or restriction specified in an ADVO:

Convicted.

Sentence to a fixed term of 18 months imprisonment to date from the 9th September 2007 and expiring on the 8th March 2009.

Aggravated Break and Enter: (Committed for sentence)

Convicted.

Sentence to a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months to date from the 9th December 2008 and expiring on the 8th June 2012. Balance of term of 1 year and 9 months expiring on the 8th March 2014.

I find special circumstances.

S166 Matters- Maliciously wound a person and Maliciously destroy/damage property: (Back-up charges)

S.166 matters dismissed.

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.

CITATION:	R v Meehan, Taris [2008] NSWDC 334
HEARING DATE(S):	13/11/2008
JUDGMENT DATE:	5 December 2008
JURISDICTION:	Criminal
JUDGMENT OF:	Nicholson SC DCJ
DECISION:	Pursuant to S.166 of Crimes Procedure Act Knowingly contravene prohibition or restriction specified in an ADVO: Convicted. Sentence to a fixed term of 18 months imprisonment to date from the 9th September 2007 and expiring on the 8th March 2009. Aggravated Break and Enter: (Committed for sentence) Convicted. Sentence to a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months to date from the 9th December 2008 and expiring on the 8th June 2012. Balance of term of 1 year and 9 months expiring on the 8th March 2014. I find special circumstances. S166 Matters- Maliciously wound a person and Maliciously destroy/damage property: (Back-up charges) S.166 matters dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal Law - aggravated B & E and commit malicious wounding - standard non parole period offence - s.166 matter - contravene apprehended domestic violence order - Form 1 matter malicious damage to motor vehicle - ex boyfriend - breaks and enters ex girlfriend's home - occupants asleep - armed with two iron bars and two knives - breaks window with bar and enters - assaults ex girlfriends son - strikes and stabs new boyfriend - five discreet injury sites - worst case of contravene apprehended domestic violence order - occasions substantial malicious damage to new boyfriends car - 29 year old single male - mental health issues - otherwise reasonable subjective circumstances - early guilty plea - full cooperation with police - standard non parole period not imposed - special circumstances found
LEGISLATION CITED:	Criminal Procedure Act
CASES CITED:	R v Gladue (1999) 1SCR 688 [80] R v Cuthbert (1967) 2 NSWR 329 R v Rushby (1977) NSWLR 597 R v Hayes [1984] 1 NSWLR 740
PARTIES:	Regina Taris Meehan
FILE NUMBER(S):	2008/11/1202
COUNSEL:	Defence: J. Nader
SOLICITORS:	Crown: Mr Greg Coles