R v Murphy - [2014] NSWDC 382

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Murphy [2014] NSWDC 382
Decision date: 17 March 2014
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:
Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years and 9 months with a non parole period of 8 months.
Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years and 9 months with a non parole period of 8 months.
Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year and 7 months with a non parole period of 11 months.
Attempted Larceny: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 months.
Total sentence: 3 years imprisonment, non parole period 11 months.

Catchwords: Criminal - Sentence, armed robbery, totality, young offender, s 11 remand, discount for plea of guilty.
Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act.
Cases Cited: R v Hearne [2001] NSWCCA 37
R v Henry & Ors (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
Kovacevic v R (2000) 111 A Crim R 131
R v Lattouf (unrep 1996 NSWCCA)
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610
R v Blackman & Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121
R v Palu [2002] NSWCCA 381
R v Trindall [2002] NSWCCA 364
Veen (No 2) v R (1988) 165 CLR 465
Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108
Category: Sentence
Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown
Henry Murphy - Offender
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms J Levick - Offender
Solicitors:
Mr Lee - Director of Public Prosecutions

File Number(s): 2013/00272292

sentence

HIS HONOUR: Henry Murphy appears today for sentence in relation to four offences to which he pleaded guilty at the Local Court and continued his pleas of guilty in this Court.
All the offences were committed on the one day, that is in the early hours of 9 September 2013 and they were committed within a short period of time of one another. They were respectively offences of armed robbery with an offensive weapon committed upon Ximing Ilinj, Derrick Wong and Alcantara Castillo, and one offence of attempting to steal property from a motor vehicle. I will deal with the facts of the matters in a moment.
The maximum penalties for the three armed robbery matters are in each case 20 years imprisonment. There is no standard non-parole period. The maximum penalty for attempted larceny is seven years imprisonment.
The prisoner was arrested on the morning of the offences and has been in custody since 9 September 2013. All time in custody will be taken into account.
The prisoner was born, as I understand it, on 19 March 1994 and thus at the time of the commission of the offences was 19 years of age, about to turn 20 years of age on 19 March this year.
The facts are that in the early hours of the morning the prisoner robbed the victims Ilinj and Wong as they were standing outside a building in the University of New South Wales having a cigarette during a break from studies and or research. The prisoner accosted the…

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 Murphy

Details

AGLC: R v Murphy [2014] NSWDC 382
Case: [2014] NSWDC 382
Decision Date: 17 March 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Murphy involved three appellants who were convicted of various offences, including armed robbery and attempted larceny. The matter was heard in the Court of Criminal Appeal. The appellants were sentenced for their roles in a coordinated armed robbery and an attempted larceny. The primary issue before the court was whether the sentences imposed by the trial judge were excessive or manifestly inadequate. A secondary issue was whether the trial judge appropriately considered the discount for the appellants' pleas of guilty.

The court reviewed the principles of sentencing, particularly focusing on the totality principle and the discount for pleas of guilty. The court held that the trial judge had considered the totality of the appellants' offending but had not adequately applied the discount for their guilty pleas. The court found that the sentences were manifestly inadequate, particularly for the primary offender, and ordered an increase in the sentences. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring that sentences reflect the gravity of the offences and appropriately account for any discounts for pleas of guilty.

The court re-sentenced the appellants, taking into account the totality of their offending and the discount for their guilty pleas. The primary offender was sentenced to 2 years and 9 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 8 months. The other two appellants were sentenced to 1 year and 7 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 11 months for their roles in the armed robbery, and an additional 6 months for the attempted larceny. The total effective sentence was set at 3 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 11 months. The court's decision underscored the necessity for judges to meticulously consider all relevant factors, including the discount for guilty pleas, when determining sentences.

Orders

Orders of the court

Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years and 9 months with a non parole period of 8 months.

Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year and 7 months with a non parole period of 11 months.

Attempted Larceny: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 months.

Total sentence: 3 years imprisonment, non parole period 11 months.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Murphy [2014] NSWDC 382
Decision date:	17 March 2014
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years and 9 months with a non parole period of 8 months. Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years and 9 months with a non parole period of 8 months. Armed Robbery: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year and 7 months with a non parole period of 11 months. Attempted Larceny: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 months. Total sentence: 3 years imprisonment, non parole period 11 months.
Catchwords:	Criminal - Sentence, armed robbery, totality, young offender, s 11 remand, discount for plea of guilty.
Legislation Cited:	Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act.
Cases Cited:	R v Hearne [2001] NSWCCA 37 R v Henry & Ors (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Kovacevic v R (2000) 111 A Crim R 131 R v Lattouf (unrep 1996 NSWCCA) Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610 R v Blackman & Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121 R v Palu [2002] NSWCCA 381 R v Trindall [2002] NSWCCA 364 Veen (No 2) v R (1988) 165 CLR 465 Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown Henry Murphy - Offender
Representation:	Counsel: Ms J Levick - Offender Solicitors: Mr Lee - Director of Public Prosecutions
File Number(s):	2013/00272292