R v Murray (No 2)
[2017] ACTSC 423
•18 September 2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Murray (No 2) |
Citation: | [2017] ACTSC 423 |
Hearing Date: | 18 September 2017 |
DecisionDate: | 18 September 2017 |
Before: | Elkaim J |
Decision: | See [8] |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – Breach of good behaviour order. |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) s 110 |
Cases Cited: | R v Murray [2016] ACTSC 173 |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Ricki Rose Murray (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel Ms M Kent (Crown) Ms H Russell (Offender) |
| Solicitors Office of the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Aboriginal Legal Service (Offender) | |
File Number: | SCC 108 of 2016 |
ELKAIM J:
This matter has come before me today because of the breach of a good behaviour order. The breach is admitted. The details of the breach are set out in the affidavit of Mr Bestmann, dated 2 February 2017.
In essence, I have been told that the conduct resulting in the breaches has arisen from some particularly personal and distressing events. In particular, the offender gave birth to a child who was removed from her care only a day after the birth.
I have also been told that the offender is 34 weeks’ pregnant. There is some possibility that she will need an emergency “C-section”.
Having regard to the remarks of the Chief Justice when the offender was sentenced on 13 July 2016 (R v Murray [2016] ACTSC 173), it seems to me that I should take a consistent approach.
It is, however, necessary for the good behaviour order to be cancelled. That is a product of s 110 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT).
The orders that I propose meet the submissions made on behalf of the offender and the extremely fair approach taken by the Crown. Because of that, I do not think that I need to provide any further reasons.
I note that the offender has served, by way of full-time custody, a period of 7 months and 23 days.
I make the following orders:
Pursuant to s 110 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT):
(i)The good behaviour order imposed by Murrell CJ on 13 July 2016 is cancelled.
(ii)In respect of the offence of aggravated robbery (CC 15/5333), the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and 3 months from 28 January 2017 to 27 April 2019.
(iii)The sentence is suspended with immediate effect.
(iv)The offender is 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 on the following condition: a probation condition that she be subject to the supervision of the Director-General or his delegate for 18 months or such lesser period as the person supervising her determines is appropriate and she obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise her especially as to counselling or treatment for mental health and abuse of alcohol or other drugs.
| I certify that the preceding eight [8] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Elkaim. Associate: Date: 27 September 2017 |