R v Murray - [2016] ACTSC 173

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Murray
Citation:	[2016] ACTSC 173
Hearing Date:	13 July 2016
DecisionDate:	13 July 2016
Before:	Murrell CJ
Decision:	Sentenced to two years and three months’ imprisonment. Sentence suspended after six months’ full-time imprisonment. Good behaviour order made. See [48]–[51].
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – aggravated robbery – in company – strong subjective factors – disadvantaged background and youth
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentence Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 9 Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 7, 33, 35, 36 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) s 310A
Cases Cited:	R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v Hodge [2015] ACTSC 214
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Ricki Rose Murray (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel Ms K MacKenzie (Crown) Mr M Stewart (Offender)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) (Offender)
File Number:	SCC 108 of 2016

MURRELL CJ:

The offender adhered to a plea of guilty to the offence of aggravated robbery (in company) contrary to s 310A of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT).

The maximum penalty for aggravated robbery is 25 years' imprisonment and/or a fine.

The plea was entered at an early stage. The Crown case was strong. However, the plea was valuable and I will allow a 25% discount for the plea.

The offender has been in custody since her arrest on 8 March 2016.

Facts

At about 9.45 pm on Monday, 26 January 2015, the offender and co-offenders, Mr Hodge and Ms Lawrence, went to the Kambah home of the victims, Mr Miles and Ms Buckley. Mr Miles was at home watching television. Ms Buckley was out.

The offenders banged on a window. Mr Miles looked out. Mr Hodge asked who was home and Mr Miles informed him that everyone was out. Mr Hodge asked whether Mr Miles had any “weed”. Mr Miles said that he did not. Mr Hodge said that he would take a bike to obtain some. Mr Miles told him that he should not do so as the bike belonged to Mr Miles' children. Mr Hodge began to yell. He punched through the window and grabbed Mr Miles' hand. The offenders moved to the locked front fly-screen door (the main door was open) and began to bang on it, calling out to Mr Miles to give them money and drugs.

Eventually, the offenders forced their way through the fly-screen door. As they entered, Ms Lawrence was carrying a chair leg. Mr Hodge pushed Mr Miles into the laundry, demanding money, drugs and the keys to Mr Miles' motorbike. Mr Miles was frightened. He took Mr Hodge upstairs to where Mr Miles' wallet was located. Mr Miles gave his motorbike keys to Mr Hodge. They returned downstairs, where the offender threatened Mr Miles and demanded his wallet. Mr Miles passed his wallet to her and she removed several cards from it.

Mr Miles ran from the house. He was chased by…

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 Murray

Details

AGLC: R v Murray [2016] ACTSC 173
Case: [2016] ACTSC 173
Decision Date: 13 July 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Murray, was convicted of aggravated robbery, which involved committing a robbery while in company with one or more other people. Murray appealed against the severity of his sentence, which was two years and three months' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of eighteen months. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. Murray argued that the sentence was excessive, considering his disadvantaged background and his youth at the time of the offence.

The court was tasked with determining whether the sentence was appropriate given the nature of the offence and the personal circumstances of the offender. The court considered the principles of sentencing for aggravated robbery, the role of aggravating factors such as the presence of accomplices, and the mitigating factors presented by Murray’s background and age. The court also had to weigh the need for general and specific deterrence against the principles of rehabilitation and proportionality in sentencing.

The court acknowledged the seriousness of the offence but found that the sentence was unduly harsh. It recognised the strong subjective factors of Murray’s disadvantaged background and his youth, which were significant in reducing the culpability. The court was persuaded that a lesser sentence would be sufficient to achieve the aims of punishment, including deterrence and rehabilitation, without being excessively punitive. As a result, the court reduced the sentence to six months’ full-time imprisonment, to be followed by a suspension after serving six months. Additionally, a good behaviour order was made to further support Murray's rehabilitation.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to two years and three months’ imprisonment. Sentence suspended after six months’ full-time imprisonment. Good behaviour order made. See [48]–[51].

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.