R v Moller

Case [2018] NSWDC 355

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Moller [2018] NSWDC 355
Hearing dates: 17 August 2018
Date of orders: 17 August 2018
Decision date: 17 August 2018
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Wilson SC DCJ
Decision:

Term of imprisonment

Catchwords: SENTENCE – armed robbery – toy gun – offensive weapon – robbery of chemist for painkillers
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: R v Collier [2012] NSWCCA 213
R v Crowe [2011] NSWCCA 251
R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
R v McNaughton (2006) 66 NSWLR 566
Turner v R [2011] NSWCCA 189
Texts Cited: None
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Steven Carl Moller (Offender)
Representation: Solicitors:
ODPP (Crown)
Panwar Legal (Offender)
File Number(s): 2018/18061
Publication restriction: None

Judgment

INTRODUCTION

  1. The offender, Steven Carl Moller, appears before the Court for sentencing after pleading guilty to the charge on the Crown Sentence Summary (Exhibit A) of robbery armed with an offensive weapon. There are no Form 1 or s 166 matters to which the Court is to have regard.

GUIDEPOSTS

  1. Relevant to the sentencing exercise is the maximum penalty which applies to the offence, which I note is 20 years' imprisonment. Plainly, the section, that is, s97(1) of the Crimes Act, contemplates a wide range of offending and I will turn in a moment to where I consider this offence falls in the scheme of that. In relation to the charge there is no standard non parole period.

PROCEDUARL HISTORY

  1. The offender has pleaded guilty and was committed for sentence on 22 May 2018 from the Wyong Local Court. I should note that he was born on 18 September 1965 and that the relevant offending took place on 17 January 2018. His plea was an early one entitling him to a discount of 25%, representing the utilitarian value of the plea to the community. As at today, the offender has been on bail and has spent no time in custody.

EVIDENCE ON SENTENCE

  1. The evidence on sentencing comprised the following on behalf of the Crown:

  1. the Crown Sentence Summary and the documents annexed thereto (Exhibit A); and

  2. the Pre Sentence Report (Exhibit B).

  1. For the Offender, the following evidence was tendered:

  1. the Offender’s Bundle (Exhibit 1);

  2. a letter from Ashley Smith dated 30 June 2018 (Exhibit 2);

  3. a letter from Allan Emery (Exhibit 3);

  4. a letter from Daniel James (Exhibit 4);

  5. a report by Danielle Vilder of the Wesley Mission (Exhibit 5); and

  6. a note from Dr Grennall (Exhibit 6).

  1. The Crown has also prepared submissions, (MFI 1), and further submissions, (MFI 2), and, together with that, several cases have been handed to the Court upon which reliance is placed respectively by both parties.

AGREED FACTS

  1. The facts relating to the offending are set out in the Statement of Agreed Facts behind tab 3 in Exhibit A. It was signed by the offender on 22 May 2018 and it provides relevantly as follows:

  2. As at January 2018 the offender was aged…

Continue reading R v Moller

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Moller [2018] NSWDC 355
Case
[2018] NSWDC 355
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Moller arose before the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the defendant, Moller, was convicted of armed robbery involving the use of a toy gun. The incident in question occurred when Moller entered a chemist armed with a toy gun and demanded painkillers. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for this offence, which involved considerations of the use of an offensive weapon and the nature of the robbery.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the toy gun constituted an offensive weapon under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). The court had to evaluate the nature of the weapon, its potential to cause harm, and the circumstances under which it was used. Additionally, the court needed to assess the seriousness of the robbery and the culpability of the offender, considering the use of the toy gun and the specific context of the crime.

In delivering its judgment, the court held that the toy gun, while not a real firearm, was an offensive weapon within the meaning of the Act. The court emphasised the seriousness of the crime, given the use of a weapon to facilitate the robbery, and the potential for causing fear and harm. The court also considered the defendant's criminal history and the circumstances surrounding the offence. Ultimately, the court determined that the appropriate sentence was a term of imprisonment, reflecting the gravity of the crime and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

The final orders of the court were that Moller be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, the specifics of which were to be determined in accordance with the sentencing principles applicable under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic).

Orders

Orders of the court

Term of imprisonment

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.