R v Ngerengere (No 3)

Link copied
Case Copied 28 min read

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Ngerengere (No 3)

Citation:

[2016] ACTSC 299

Hearing Date:

5 September 2016

DecisionDate:

28 September 2016

Before:

Refshauge ACJ

Decision:

1.             Michael Ngerengere be convicted of aggravated burglary on 7 August 2015.

2.             Michael Ngerengere be sentenced to 18 months imprisonment to commence on 7 May 2016.

3.             Michael Ngerengere be convicted of theft on 7 August 2015.

4.             Michael Ngerengere be sentenced to 12 months imprisonment to commence on 7 May 2016. 

5.             The sentence be suspended for a period of 12 months from 28 September 2016.

6.             Michael Ngerengere be required 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 with the following conditions:

(a)     a probation condition that he accept the   supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for 18 months or such lesser period as the person supervising him considers appropriate and obey all reasonable directions of the person supervising him;

(b)     a condition that:

        (i)    he continue in the Bridge Program at Canberra Recovery Services until he has completed it; and

        (ii)   if for any reason he leave or is discharged from the Bridge Program before he has completed it, he present himself in person to the Registrar of the Supreme Court within two working days for a review of this Good Behaviour Order.

7.             Michael Ngerengere pay to the Registrar of the Supreme Court of the ACT within four years the sum of $2213, to be paid out to Mr Peter Cain, at the address provided by the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and punishment – sentencing – aggravated burglary – theft – guilty plea – assessment for an Intensive Correction Order – suitability for an Intensive Correction Order – reasons for not proceeding with an Intensive Correction Order – sentencing procedures – suspended sentence – sentence back-dated to take into account
pre-sentence custody and residential drug rehabilitation – wholly concurrent sentence – reparation – Good Behaviour Order

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), ss 7, 29(1)(b), 78, 78(6), 78(7), 79, 118, Pt 4.2
Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 7
Mental Health Act 2015 (ACT), s 58

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), ss 308, 312

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Regulations 2013 (NSW), reg 14

Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 4733

Cases Cited:

Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342
Davey (1980) 2 A Crim R 254
Director of Public Prosecutions v Karazisis (2010) 31 VR 634
Douar v The Queen (2005) 159 A Crim R 154
Hawkins v Hawkins (2009) 3 ACTLR 210
Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506
Oliver (1982) 7 A Crim R 174
R v Boughen (2012) 215 A Crim R 476
R v EL [2016] ACTSC 241
R v Elphick (No 2) [2015] ACTSC 23
R v Ingram [2016] ACTSC 199
R…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Ngerengere (No 3) and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2016] ACTSC 299
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Ngerengere (No 3), Michael Ngerengere was convicted of aggravated burglary and theft. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The central issue before the court was the appropriate sentencing for the offences committed by Ngerengere, particularly considering his plea of guilty and the possibility of an Intensive Correction Order.

The court had to decide whether Ngerengere was suitable for an Intensive Correction Order, given the circumstances of the offences and his background. The court concluded that while Ngerengere was eligible for such an order, it was not the appropriate sentence in this case. The court highlighted the seriousness of the offences and the need for a custodial sentence to ensure public safety and deter future criminal behaviour. The court also took into account the time Ngerengere had already spent in pre-sentence custody and his participation in a residential drug rehabilitation program.

Following these considerations, the court sentenced Ngerengere to 18 months imprisonment for the aggravated burglary and 12 months for the theft, with the sentences to run concurrently. The court suspended the sentence for 12 months, effective from 28 September 2016, to allow Ngerengere to continue his rehabilitation efforts. Additionally, Ngerengere was required to comply with a Good Behaviour Order, which included specific conditions such as supervision by the Director-General and participation in the Bridge Program at Canberra Recovery Services. Ngerengere was also ordered to pay reparations to the victim in the amount of $2213.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Michael Ngerengere be convicted of aggravated burglary on 7 August 2015.

2. Michael Ngerengere be sentenced to 18 months imprisonment to commence on 7 May 2016.

3. Michael Ngerengere be convicted of theft on 7 August 2015.

4. Michael Ngerengere be sentenced to 12 months imprisonment to commence on 7 May 2016.

5. The sentence be suspended for a period of 12 months from 28 September 2016.

6. Michael Ngerengere be required 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 with the following conditions:

(a) a probation condition that he accept the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for 18 months or such lesser period as the person supervising him considers appropriate and obey all reasonable directions of the person supervising him;

(b) a condition that:

(i) he continue in the Bridge Program at Canberra Recovery Services until he has completed it; and

(ii) if for any reason he leave or is discharged from the Bridge Program before he has completed it, he present himself in person to the Registrar of the Supreme Court within two working days for a review of this Good Behaviour Order.

7. Michael Ngerengere pay to the Registrar of the Supreme Court of the ACT within four years the sum of $2213, to be paid out to Mr Peter Cain, at the address provided by the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions.

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.