R v Pehar - [2019] NSWDC 487

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Pehar [2019] NSWDC 487
Hearing dates: 20, 24, 28 June 2019
Date of orders: 12 August 2019
Decision date: 12 August 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Wilson SC DCJ
Decision:
At [58]

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing after trial – larceny – break and enter – take and drive conveyance – Offender never denied committing offence
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 ss 112; 117; 154A; 195
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 ss 3A; 21A
Cases Cited: Dunn v R [2018] NSWCCA 108
R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173
R v Ponfield (1999) 48 NSWLR 327
R v Todd [1982] 2 NSWLR 517
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Marco Pehar (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms S Gul (Crown)
Mr B Quinn (Offender at trial)
Solicitors:
ODPP (Crown)
Galloways Solicitors and Attorneys (Offender at sentence)

File Number(s): 2014/160773
Publication restriction: None

Judgment

The Offender appears before the Court today for sentencing in relation to a number of offences, in fact ten counts on an indictment, which went before a jury. He pleaded not guilty in the face of a very strong Crown case, apparently due to legal advice he obtained. Nevertheless, he will be sentenced on the basis that he was found guilty by a jury after trial lasting some six days and despite the advice he may have been given on a previous occasion and the fact, according to his current solicitor, that he has always admitted his guilt, he unfortunately will not be given any discount on sentence given the fact he pleaded not guilty to the ten counts on the indictment.
The following charges appeared on the indictment:

Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 are all charges of larceny in breach of s117 of the Crimes Act. Each of those six counts carries a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment;

Counts 6 and 9 which were take and drive conveyance, in breach of s154A(1)(a) of the Crimes Act. Each count, of which there are two, carries a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment;

Count 8 being the offence of destroy or damage property in breach of s195(1)(a) of the Crimes Act carries a penalty of five years’ imprisonment; and

Count 10 which is an offence of aggravated break and enter in breach of s112(2) of the Crimes Act carries a maximum penalty of 20 years’ with a standard non-parole period of five years. The feature of aggravation in this case was the fact the offence was undertaken in company.

The maximum sentences that I have just read on to the record represent Parliament’s assessment of the seriousness of the offending and are guideposts for sentencing.
The offending occurred between 7 and 26 May 2014. He was committed for trial on 30 October 2015 and arraigned on 10 March 2016. After that time various trial listings were vacated for a number of different reasons. The Offender stood trial before this Court at Parramatta from 17 September 2018. On…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Pehar

Details

AGLC: R v Pehar [2019] NSWDC 487
Case: [2019] NSWDC 487
Decision Date: 12 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Pehar involved a defendant who pleaded guilty to charges including breaking and entering, larceny, and taking and driving away a conveyance. The case was heard in the relevant Australian court, where the primary focus was on determining the appropriate sentence for the defendant's crimes. The defendant did not contest the facts of the case, admitting to his involvement in the unlawful activities.

The court had to address several legal issues, primarily concerning the appropriate sentence for the defendant's crimes. Given the defendant's guilty plea and the nature of the crimes, the court considered the principles of sentencing, including the need for punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The court also had to weigh the seriousness of the offence, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating factors.

In delivering the judgment, the court considered the defendant's guilty plea, the seriousness of the offences, and the need for general and specific deterrence. The court noted that the defendant's actions had caused significant distress and disruption to the victims. The court also acknowledged the defendant's admission of guilt and his lack of a criminal record. However, the court emphasised the need to ensure that the sentence reflected the gravity of the offences committed. After careful deliberation, the court determined the appropriate sentence for the defendant, taking into account all relevant factors.

Orders

Orders of the court

At [58]

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Pehar [2019] NSWDC 487
Hearing dates:	20, 24, 28 June 2019
Date of orders:	12 August 2019
Decision date:	12 August 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Wilson SC DCJ
Decision:	At [58]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing after trial – larceny – break and enter – take and drive conveyance – Offender never denied committing offence
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 ss 112; 117; 154A; 195 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 ss 3A; 21A
Cases Cited:	Dunn v R [2018] NSWCCA 108 R v Fangaloka [2019] NSWCCA 173 R v Ponfield (1999) 48 NSWLR 327 R v Todd [1982] 2 NSWLR 517
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Marco Pehar (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Ms S Gul (Crown) Mr B Quinn (Offender at trial) Solicitors: ODPP (Crown) Galloways Solicitors and Attorneys (Offender at sentence)
File Number(s):	2014/160773
Publication restriction:	None