R v Papuni

[2019] NSWDC 269

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Papuni [2019] NSWDC 269
Hearing dates:	24 January 2019
Date of orders:	24 January 2019
Decision date:	24 January 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:	Intensive Corrections Order for a period of 18 months: at [24].
Catchwords:	SENTENCING — Single offence — Robbery in company SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Home of victim or any other person — Breach of conditional liberty SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty— Remorse — Rehabilitation — Unlikely to re-offend SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Objective seriousness
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Crimes Act 1900
Cases Cited:	R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v Lulham (2016) 263 A Crim R 287
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown)   Nathan Papuni (Offender)
Representation:	Ms O’Loughlin (Crown)   In person (Offender)
File Number(s):	2018/102544

Judgment

1. Nathan Papuni, born in 1979, appears today unrepresented for sentence having pleaded guilty to one charge under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 of robbery in company which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment, with no standard non-parole period. He pleaded guilty at the earliest possible opportunity and the Crown concedes that he is entitled to a 25% discount on any term of imprisonment for the utilitarian value of that plea.

2. The matter originally came before me last week as a mention, the offender having been taken into custody on a warrant. It was anticipated that he would be dealt with at the same time as two co-offenders Anthony Button and Aaron Cargill. Button failed to appear at Central Local Court on 27 November 2018 and a bench warrant has been issued for his arrest. Cargill has his case listed for mention in this court on 1 February 2019. However I was persuaded last week by Mr Papuni that he should be granted bail and that he wished to have his sentence dealt with as soon as possible. I adjourned the matter for today to enable him to do so. He has appeared without apparently having taken any legal advice, but still wishes to have his matter finalised today. He has given brief evidence as to his circumstances and has been cross-examined by the Crown Prosecutor.

3. He was in custody from the date of his arrest on 2 April 2018 until 18 January 2019. As he put it to me last week, he had served almost nine months for stealing a mobile phone, but there is a little more to it than that. He did however point out that both his alleged co-offenders had been on bail for the whole of that time.

4. The Agreed Facts show that the victim of the robbery is a Mr Lukins who lived in the Northcote Building in Surry Hills. At about 7.30am on 2 April Mr Lukins friend visited his unit and after he entered the unit the three co-offenders observed the unit from the lift area. They approached and tried to open…