R v Ngata

Case [2023] NSWDC 434


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Ngata [2023] NSWDC 434
Hearing dates: 13 October 2023
Date of orders: 13 October 2023
Decision date: 13 October 2023
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Scotting DCJ
Decision:

1   Nimilote Ngata is convicted.

2   Taking into account the discount for the plea of guilty, I impose a term of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 18 months to date from 13 October 2022. The non-parole period will expire on 12 April 2024 and the head sentence will expire on 12 October 2026.

3   The offender will be eligible to apply for parole on 12 April 2024.

Catchwords:

CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery in company

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:

Legge v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 244

R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346

R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270

Category:Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Nimilote Ngata (Offender)
Representation:

Counsel:
I Todd (Offender)

Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Zahr Partners (Offender)
File Number(s): 2022/241842
Publication restriction: None

JUDGMENT

Introduction

  1. Nimilote Ngata (the offender) appears for sentence after pleading guilty in the Local Court to an offence of robbery in company contrary to s 97(1), Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty for the offence is 20 years imprisonment.

Approach to Sentencing

  1. To the extent that I make findings of fact adverse to the offender, I am satisfied of that fact beyond reasonable doubt. To the extent that I make findings of fact favourable to the offender, I am satisfied of that fact on the balance of probabilities: R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 at [27] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Hayne and Callinan JJ).

  2. I have taken into account the purposes of sentencing set out in s 3A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and had regard to the matters set out in s 21A of the Act.

  3. The offender entered a plea of guilty in the Local Court and is entitled to a 25% discount on sentence: s 25D(2)(a) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

Facts

  1. The parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts. I have taken the entirety of the document into account in coming to an appropriate sentence. What follows is a brief summary of the facts relevant to the offender to permit an understanding of the sentence imposed.

  2. The victim is 62 years old and lives alone in Drummoyne. He is a user of prohibited drugs.

  3. The victim and the co-offender, Andrew Sharp, were known to each other because the victim had previously purchased drugs from him on two prior occasions. The victim knew the co-offender as “Blacky”. He stopped purchasing drugs from the co-offender because he was unreliable.

  4. In around mid-June 2022, the victim received a phone call from an unknown number. The male on the phone introduced himself as “Blacky” and the victim recognised the co-offender. The co-offender told the victim that he had been released from gaol and if he needed any drugs,…

Continue reading R v Ngata

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Ngata [2023] NSWDC 434
Case
[2023] NSWDC 434
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Nimilote Ngata, was convicted of robbery in company, a violent offence, in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The incident in question involved Ngata, along with an accomplice, robbing a convenience store at night, wielding a knife and causing fear to the staff and customers present. The Crown presented evidence of the appellant's role in the offence, including CCTV footage and witness testimony. Ngata entered a plea of guilty, leading to a sentencing hearing to determine the appropriate penalty.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine an appropriate sentence for Ngata, taking into account the circumstances of the offence and the mitigating factors presented. The court considered the appellant's guilty plea as a significant mitigating factor, warranting a discount on the sentence. However, the court also had to weigh the severity of the offence, the impact on the victims, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The court was required to balance these considerations to impose a sentence that is just and proportionate to the offence committed.

In delivering the judgment, the sentencing judge acknowledged the appellant's guilty plea, which resulted in a discount on the sentence. However, the court emphasised the seriousness of the offence, highlighting the fear and trauma caused to the victims. The judge took into account the appellant's background, including previous convictions and the impact of personal circumstances on his offending behaviour. Ultimately, the court imposed a term of imprisonment of 4 years, with a non-parole period of 18 months, reflecting the need for punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The sentence was designed to address the appellant's offending behaviour while providing an opportunity for rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

Orders

Orders of the court

1 Nimilote Ngata is convicted.

2 Taking into account the discount for the plea of guilty, I impose a term of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 18 months to date from 13 October 2022. The non-parole period will expire on 12 April 2024 and the head sentence will expire on 12 October 2026.

3 The offender will be eligible to apply for parole on 12 April 2024.

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.