R v Munro - [2016] ACTSC 222

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Munro
Citation:	[2016] ACTSC 222
Hearing Date:	7 July 2016
DecisionDate:	13 July 2016
Before:	Refshauge J
Decision:	1. The conviction of the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm is confirmed (CC 10/3935). 2. The Good Behaviour Order made on 19 November 2012 be cancelled. 3. Alex Robert Munro be sentenced to 18 months imprisonment to commence on 25 April 2016. 4. The sentence be suspended today, 13 July 2016, for a period of 18 months. 5. Alex Robert Munro be required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offender’s good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of 18 months from today with a probation condition that he be subject to the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him especially as to mental health treatment and counselling and drug counselling and treatment.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Breach of Good Behaviour Order – re-offending – original good behaviour period almost completed – Good Behaviour Order now expired – new Good Behaviour Order made
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), ss 75(1)(f), 86(1)(a), 86(1)(a)(i), 107(2), 110 Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), ss 7, 12
Cases Cited:	Guy v Anderson [2013] ACTSC 5 R v Curtis (No 2) [2016] ACTSC 34 R v Kekalainen (No 2) [2015] ACTSC 369 R v Munro (Unreported, Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Refshauge J, No SCC 207 of 2010, 14 May 2012) R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269 Saga v Reid [2010] ACTSC 59
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Alex Robert Munro (Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel Ms K MacKenzie (Crown) Mr D Johns (Defendant)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid (ACT) (Defendant)
File Number:	SCC 207 of 2010

REFSHAUGE J:

After a trial, Alex Robert Munro, the accused, was acquitted by a jury of recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm, but convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

On 14 May 2012, I sentenced Mr Munro to imprisonment for 18 months, six months of which was to be served by periodic detention and, at the end of that period, the sentence was suspended for a period of two years. I made a Good Behaviour Order, as required under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), for a period of two years and six months from that day. See R v Munro (Unreported, Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Refshauge J, No SCC 207 of 2010, 14 May 2012) (R v Munro (No 1)).

Unfortunately, Mr Munro was unable to complete the period of periodic detention because of mental health problems. The Sentence Administration Board referred the matter back to me under s 75(1)(f) of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (as it was in November 2012) and on 19 November 2012, I re-sentenced Mr Munro to 18 months imprisonment,…

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 Munro

Details

AGLC: R v Munro [2016] ACTSC 222
Case: [2016] ACTSC 222
Decision Date: 13 July 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Alex Robert Munro, was charged with breaching a Good Behaviour Order by re-offending while the original period was almost completed and after the order had expired. The matter was heard in the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory. The appeal was against a decision of the Magistrates Court, which had found that Munro had breached a Good Behaviour Order by committing an offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and had sentenced him to imprisonment.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Magistrates Court was correct in finding that Munro had breached a Good Behaviour Order by committing the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and if so, whether the sentence imposed was appropriate. The Court had to consider whether the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm constituted a breach of the Good Behaviour Order, given that the order had expired at the time of the offence. Additionally, the Court had to determine the appropriate sentence for Munro, considering the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the breach.

The Court found that the Magistrates Court was correct in finding that Munro had breached the Good Behaviour Order by committing the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The Court held that the offence constituted a breach of the order, even though the order had expired at the time of the offence. The Court further found that the sentence imposed by the Magistrates Court was appropriate, taking into account the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the breach. The Court confirmed the conviction and imposed a sentence of 18 months imprisonment, suspended for a period of 18 months, with conditions including mental health treatment, counselling, and drug counselling and treatment.

The final orders of the Court were that the conviction of the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm was confirmed. The Good Behaviour Order made on 19 November 2012 was cancelled. Munro was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment, which was suspended for a period of 18 months. Munro was also required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offender’s good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of 18 months, and be subject to supervision and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The conviction of the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm is confirmed (CC 10/3935).

2. The Good Behaviour Order made on 19 November 2012 be cancelled.

3. Alex Robert Munro be sentenced to 18 months imprisonment to commence on 25 April 2016.

4. The sentence be suspended today, 13 July 2016, for a period of 18 months.

5. Alex Robert Munro be required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offender’s good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of 18 months from today with a probation condition that he be subject to the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate and obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him especially as to mental health treatment and counselling and drug counselling and treatment.

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.