R v Newton

[2002] SASC 36

R v NEWTON
[2001] SASC 36

Court of Criminal Appeal:  Perry, Wicks and Gray JJ

1. PERRY J.               This is an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions for leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon the respondent in the District Court, following her plea of guilty to a charge of armed robbery.

2. The learned sentencing judge imposed a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months against which he fixed a non-parole period of 9 months. He directed that the head sentence and the non-parole period both commence on 15 June 2001, being the day upon which the respondent was taken into custody.

3. The offence occurred on the preceding day, that is, on 14 June 2001, at about 4.45 pm. A few minutes beforehand the victim, a woman then aged 27 years, had made a withdrawal at an ATM machine on the north-west corner of Victoria Square. She then bought a packet of cigarettes at a shop in Grote Street.

4. As she was walking back to the SGIC building in Victoria Square, which is where she worked, she was accosted by the respondent, who asked her for a cigarette. The victim offered her one, whereupon the respondent said that she had seen the victim go to the ATM.

5. The respondent then demanded money, at the same time moving closer to the victim, and stating that she had been in gaol and “been in trouble”. The respondent grabbed the victim by the left shoulder and pulled her closer, at which stage the victim felt a prick to the lower right abdomen. The victim then noticed that the respondent had a syringe, which appeared to be empty, in her right hand. The respondent said that she had just got out of gaol and had AIDS.

6. The victim proceeded to hand her purse over to the respondent, who removed all of the money from it, about $80, and handed the purse back. The respondent then ran along a side street to Franklin Street, past the GPO, eventually disappearing down the lane leading off King William Street running along the south side of the Town Hall.

7. As it turned out, the respondent had been released on an unrelated matter from the cells of the Adelaide Magistrates Court at about 3.15 pm on the day of the offence. When she was discharged from custody, amongst her property returned to her was the syringe in question.

8. The respondent is a heroin addict. She was “hanging out” at the time of the robbery and desperate for money to get a “fix”.

9. Contrary to her assertion to the victim, the respondent does not have AIDS. However she has tested positive to hepatitis C, which was believed to be dormant at the time.

10. Tests undertaken by the victim indicated that at the time the respondent was sentenced the victim had not contracted hepatitis C, but it was possible that ongoing tests might prove positive.

11. The respondent is a young woman, born on 21 October 1977. She was…