R v Pout

Case [2020] NSWDC 751 15 December 2020

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v POUT [2020] NSWDC 751
Hearing dates: 12 November 2020
Date of orders: 15 December 2020
Decision date: 15 December 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Lerve DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence - see paragraphs [145-149]

Catchwords:
CRIME - Property offences - Break and enter dwelling house and commit serious indictable offence
CRIME - Public justice offences - Threatening or intimidating victims or witnesses
CRIME - Sexual offences — Sexual assault
SENTENCING - Sentencing procedure - Aggregate sentences - Reasons for sentence
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence - Deterrence - Form 1 offences - Moral culpability - Multiple offences
SENTENCING - Subjective considerations on sentence - Age of offender
SENTENCING - Aggravating factors - Home of victim or any other person – presence of child

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999
Crimes Act, 1900

Cases Cited:
Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114
Attorney General’s Application Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146.
Black v R [2013] NSWCCA 265
Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131
Cole v R [2010] NSWCCA 227;
Currie v R [2013] NSWCCA 267
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; 205 Crim R 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209
Gore v R; Hunter v R (2010) 208 A Crim R 353
Herbert v R [2015] NSWCCA 172
Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 169
Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45
Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141
Jolly v R [2013] NSWCCA 76
Keeley v R [2014] NSWCCA 139
Locke v R (2010) 207 A Crim R 34
McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39
Ngati v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 125
Piscitelli v R [2013] NSWCCA 8
R v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575; [2004] NSWCCA 434
R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603
R v Elyard [2006] NSWCCA 43
R v Mitchell & Gallagher (2007) 177 A Crim R 94
R v Omar [2015] NSWCCA 67
Simmons v R [2019] NSWCCA 20
Simon v R [2013] NSWCCA 328
SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197
Stephens v R [2010] NSWCCA 93
Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247
Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465
Zreika v R (2012) 223 A Crim R 460

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Edward POUT
Representation: Counsel:
Mr M King (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Ms L Hanshaw, ODPP (for the Crown)

File Number(s): 2018/254272, 2020/149616
Publication restriction: NO PUBLICATION of the name of the complainant or anything that would tend to identify them.

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender appeared before a Magistrate at the Wagga Wagga Local Court on 13 May 2020 and entered pleas of guilty to the following:

H68356623 Sequence 1:

That (he) on 17 August 2018 in Wagga Wagga in the State…

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 Pout

Details

AGLC: R v Pout [2020] NSWDC 751
Case: [2020] NSWDC 751
Decision Date: 15 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Pout involved an appeal against sentence by the defendant, who had been convicted of a series of serious criminal offences. The respondent was found guilty of breaking and entering a dwelling house and committing a serious indictable offence, threatening or intimidating a victim or witness, and sexual assault. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal where the primary issue was the appropriateness of the aggregate sentence imposed by the lower court.

The court was required to consider the relevant legal principles governing the aggregation of sentences for multiple offences, including the moral culpability of the offender, the deterrence aspect, and the subjective considerations such as the age of the offender. The appeal also raised questions about the presence of a child in the victim's home as an aggravating factor. The respondent argued that the cumulative sentence was excessive and that the lower court had failed to adequately consider the individual circumstances of the offences and the offender.

In delivering the judgment, the court acknowledged the severity of the crimes committed by the respondent but also recognised the need for proportionality in sentencing. The court considered the cumulative effect of the offences, the moral blameworthiness, and the need for deterrence. The presence of a child in the victim's home was noted as an aggravating factor, adding to the overall culpability. However, the court also took into account the respondent's age and the potential for rehabilitation. After a thorough analysis, the court determined that the aggregate sentence was appropriate, balancing the need for punishment with the principles of justice and proportionality.

The court upheld the aggregate sentence imposed by the lower court, finding it to be neither manifestly excessive nor inadequate. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the original sentence stood as the final order of the court.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence - see paragraphs [145-149]

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.

Actions

Citations

R v Pout [2020] NSWDC 751

Cases Citing This Decision

No citing cases yet.

Cases Cited

Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209
Citation 1 (Para 60)

…ime of the offending. He has a significant history in the Children’s Court. It was accepted at the sentence hearing that the decision of Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209 especially at [91]-[97] does not apply in this matter as there has not been a gap of two years in the offending. The Children’s Court matters include A…
Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 169
Citation 2 (Para 39)

…e objective seriousness by reference to where it sits within a range of objective seriousness. The Crown then refers to the decision of Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 169 at [79]-[81] per Wilson J, (Johnson and Wright JJ agreeing). However, I note what was said by Johnson J (Payne JA, Simpson AJA agreeing) in Tepania v R…
Simmons v The Queen [2019] NSWCCA 20
Citation 3 (Para 64)

…riate sentence in the matter. I note and have regard to the manner in which the Court of Criminal Appeal dealt with the issue of youth in Simmons v R [2019] NSWCCA 20, especially at [23]ff.…
Tepania v The Queen [2018] NSWCCA 247
Citation 4 (Para 39)

…79]-[81] per Wilson J, (Johnson and Wright JJ agreeing). However, I note what was said by Johnson J (Payne JA, Simpson AJA agreeing) in Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 at 112 namely:…
SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197
Citation 5 (Para 92)

…Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45 and Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 at [81] per Garling J. I also note the comments by the Chief Justice in SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 at [61]ff.…
Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131
Citation 6 (Para 63)

…Mr King in his comprehensive written submissions refers to the judgment of Rothman J in Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131 at [68]-[75]. That decision involved an offender who was 18 years of age and was being sentenced for a sexual assault. Rothman J at [72]-[75] said:…
Herbert v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 172
Citation 7

…a Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; 205 Crim R 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209 Gore v R; Hunter v R (2010) 208 A Crim R 353 Herbert v R [2015] NSWCCA 172 Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 169 Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45 Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141 Jolly v R [2013] NSWCCA 76 Keeley v R [2014] NSWCCA 139 L…
R v Omar [2015] NSWCCA 67
Citation 8

…Crim R 575; [2004] NSWCCA 434 R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603 R v Elyard [2006] NSWCCA 43 R v Mitchell & Gallagher (2007) 177 A Crim R 94 R v Omar [2015] NSWCCA 67 Simmons v R [2019] NSWCCA 20 Simon v R [2013] NSWCCA 328 SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 Stephens v R [2010] NSWCCA 93 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 Veen v The Qu…
Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215
Citation 9 (Para 92)

…tatistics however I warn myself about the use of those statistics conformably with cases such as Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45 and Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 at [81] per Garling J. I also note the comments by the Chief Justice in SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 at [61]ff.…
Keeley v R [2014] NSWCCA 139
Citation 10

…CCA 172 Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 169 Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45 Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141 Jolly v R [2013] NSWCCA 76 Keeley v R [2014] NSWCCA 139 Locke v R (2010) 207 A Crim R 34 McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 Ngati v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 125 Piscitelli v R [201…
Ngati v R [2014] NSWCCA 125
Citation 11 (Para 85)

…Beech-Jones J in giving the leading judgment in Ngati v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 125 said at [46] said:…
Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114
Citation 12 (Para 83)

…In Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114 Simpson J (as her Honour then was) in giving the judgment of the court at [33] said:…
Simon v R [2013] NSWCCA 328
Citation 13

…03 R v Elyard [2006] NSWCCA 43 R v Mitchell & Gallagher (2007) 177 A Crim R 94 R v Omar [2015] NSWCCA 67 Simmons v R [2019] NSWCCA 20 Simon v R [2013] NSWCCA 328 SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 Stephens v R [2010] NSWCCA 93 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Zreika v R (2012) 223 A Cr…
Black v R [2013] NSWCCA 265
Citation 14

…SWCCA 114 Attorney General’s Application Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146. Black v R [2013] NSWCCA 265 Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131 Cole v R [2010] NSWCCA 227; Currie v R [2013] NSWCCA 267 DPP (Cth…
Currie v R [2013] NSWCCA 267
Citation 15

…13] NSWCCA 265 Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131 Cole v R [2010] NSWCCA 227; Currie v R [2013] NSWCCA 267 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; 205 Crim R 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209 Gore v R; Hunter v R (2010) 208 A Crim R 353 Herbert…
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Citation 16 (Para 71)

…enders Bugmy Bar Book Project. Clearly, given the material from Professor Greenberg, the principles enunciated by the High Court in Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 are enlivened reducing the offender’s moral culpability.…
Jolly v R [2013] NSWCCA 76
Citation 17 (Para 44)

…In Jolly v R [2013] NSWCCA 76 Bellew J (Hoeben CJ at CL, Slattery J agreeing) said at [72]:…
Piscitelli v R [2013] NSWCCA 8
Citation 18

…R (2010) 207 A Crim R 34 McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 Ngati v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 125 Piscitelli v R [2013] NSWCCA 8 R v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575; [2004] NSWCCA 434 R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603 R v Elyard [2006] NSWCCA 43 R v Mitchell & Gallagher (2007) 177 A Crim R 94…
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39
Citation 19 (Para 82)

…In Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 the court said at [54]:…
Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141
Citation 20 (Para 53)

…relevant to an extent noting that the serious indictable offence is Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm. There is also the decision of Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141 at [52] per Adams J in assessing what is a “mid range” offence contrary to s 112(2) of the Crimes Act . Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm like l…
Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45
Citation 21 (Para 92)

…e carefully considered the statistics however I warn myself about the use of those statistics conformably with cases such as Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45 and Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 at [81] per Garling J. I also note the comments by the Chief Justice in SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 at [61]ff.…
Cole v R [2010] NSWCCA 227
Citation 22

…2) 56 NSWLR 146. Black v R [2013] NSWCCA 265 Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131 Cole v R [2010] NSWCCA 227; Currie v R [2013] NSWCCA 267 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; 205 Crim R 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209 Gore v R; Hunter v R (…
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Citation 23 (Para 81)

…McClellan CJ at CL in DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; 205 A Crim R 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 said at [177]-[178]:…
Stephens v R [2010] NSWCCA 93
Citation 24

…(2007) 177 A Crim R 94 R v Omar [2015] NSWCCA 67 Simmons v R [2019] NSWCCA 20 Simon v R [2013] NSWCCA 328 SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 Stephens v R [2010] NSWCCA 93 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Zreika v R (2012) 223 A Crim R 460 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina Edward POUT…
R v King [2009] NSWCCA 117
Citation 25 (Para 36)

…tercourse which occurs in offending of this nature should not be considered in isolation, and then ranked in some form of hierarchy (see R v King [2009] NSWCCA 117 at [36] per McClellan CJ at CL).”…
McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94
Citation 26 (Para 53)

…e offender breaking into the premises. The authorities such as R v Mitchell & Gallagher (2007) 177 A Crim R 94 at [27] per Howie J and McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94 at [37] per Howie J are relevant to an extent noting that the serious indictable offence is Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm. There is also the…
Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195
Citation 27 (Para 32)

…A 249 at [35] - [45]; R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255; R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 at [33] - [36]; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 at [32]; Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195 at [14]-[18]; and R v Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90 at [28]. They can be summarised in the following manner: ● Where the state of a person's mental health con…
R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102
Citation 28 (Para 5)

…ty it may nevertheless be appropriate to moderate the need for general or specific deterrence: R v Skura [2004] VSCA 53; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269 at [5].”…
R v Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90
Citation 29 (Para 14)

…255; R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 at [33] - [36]; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 at [32]; Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195 at [14]-[18]; and R v Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90 at [28]. They can be summarised in the following manner: ● Where the state of a person's mental health contributes to the commission of the offence in…
Elyard v R [2006] NSWCCA 43
Citation 30 (Para 38)

…the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act great care will need to be taken to ensure that the matters are not double counted – see for e.g. R v Elyard [2006] NSWCCA 43 at [38]-[45] per Howie J, especially at [39]-[40].…
R v AJP [2004] NSWCCA 434
Citation 31 (Para 40)

…ing involve penile/vaginal intercourse, fellatio and digital penetration. Simpson J (as her Honour then was) said in R v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575; [2004] NSWCCA 434 at [24]:…
R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228
Citation 32 (Para 33)

…v R [2000] WASCA 203; (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 at [43] - [51]; R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249 at [35] - [45]; R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255; R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 at [33] - [36]; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 at [32]; Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195 at [14]-[18]; and R v Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90 at [28]. They can be s…
R v Pearson [2004] NSWCCA 129
Citation 33 (Para 51)

…54]; Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66 at [23]; R v Jiminez [1999] WASCA 7 at [23], [25]; Tsiaras at 400; Lauritsen at [51]; Israil at [23]; R v Pearson [2004] NSWCCA 129 at [43]; Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90 at [28]. ● It may also have the consequence that an offender is an inappropriate vehicle for general deterrence resulting…
R v Skura [2004] VSCA 53
Citation 34

…fender has a mental disorder of modest severity it may nevertheless be appropriate to moderate the need for general or specific deterrence: R v Skura [2004] VSCA 53; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269 at [5].”…
Re Attorney-General's Application (No 1 of 2002) (NSW) [2002] NSWCCA 518
Citation 35 (Para 6)

…cation Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 otherwise known as the Guideline Judgment on Form 1 matters reported (2002) 56 NSWLR 146.…
R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255
Citation 36 (Para 35)

…A 267 at [40] - [48]; Lauritsen v R [2000] WASCA 203; (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 at [43] - [51]; R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249 at [35] - [45]; R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255; R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 at [33] - [36]; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 at [32]; Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195 at [14]-[18]; and R v Henry [2007] N…
Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67
Citation 37

…82] HCA 55 at 324-325 (Brennan J). Motive for the commission of an offence is an important factor on sentence: Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67 at 55-56 [171]-[172] (Callinan J).”…
R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249
Citation 38 (Para 43)

…1996] 1 VR 398 at 400; R v Fahda [1999] NSWCCA 267 at [40] - [48]; Lauritsen v R [2000] WASCA 203; (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 at [43] - [51]; R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249 at [35] - [45]; R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255; R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 at [33] - [36]; R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102 at [32]; Courtney v R [2007] NS…
Lauritsen v R [2000] WASCA 203
Citation 39 (Para 40)

…ntencing: see, eg, R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67; R v Tsiarias [1996] 1 VR 398 at 400; R v Fahda [1999] NSWCCA 267 at [40] - [48]; Lauritsen v R [2000] WASCA 203; (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 at [43] - [51]; R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249 at [35] - [45]; R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255; R v Hemsley [2004] NSWCCA 228 at [33]…
R v Fahda [1999] NSWCCA 267
Citation 40 (Para 40)

…have developed principles to be applied when sentencing: see, eg, R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67; R v Tsiarias [1996] 1 VR 398 at 400; R v Fahda [1999] NSWCCA 267 at [40] - [48]; Lauritsen v R [2000] WASCA 203; (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 at [43] - [51]; R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249 at [35] - [45]; R v Israil [2002] NS…
Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66
Citation 41 (Para 254)

…ly the need to denounce the crime may be reduced with a reduction in the sentence: R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 at [254]; Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66 at [23]; R v Jiminez [1999] WASCA 7 at [23], [25]; Tsiaras at 400; Lauritsen at [51]; Israil at [23]; R v Pearson [2004] NSWCCA 129 at [43]; Henry [2007]…
R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111
Citation 42 (Para 254)

…fender's moral culpability may be reduced. Consequently the need to denounce the crime may be reduced with a reduction in the sentence: R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 at [254]; Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66 at [23]; R v Jiminez [1999] WASCA 7 at [23], [25]; Tsiaras at 400; Lauritsen at [51]; Israil at [23];…
R v Jiminez [1999] WASCA 7
Citation 43 (Para 23)

…be reduced with a reduction in the sentence: R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 at [254]; Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66 at [23]; R v Jiminez [1999] WASCA 7 at [23], [25]; Tsiaras at 400; Lauritsen at [51]; Israil at [23]; R v Pearson [2004] NSWCCA 129 at [43]; Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90 at [28]. ● It may also ha…
R v Henry [1999] NSWCA 111
Citation 44 (Para 254)

…ability may be reduced. Consequently the need to denounce the crime may be reduced with a reduction in the sentence: R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 at [254]; Miller v R [1999] WASCA 66 at [23]; R v Jiminez [1999] WASCA 7 at [23], [25]; Tsiaras at 400; Lauritsen at [51]; Israil at [23]; R v Pearson [2…
R v Jiminez [1999] NSWCCA 7
Citation 45

…mental problems the courts have developed principles to be applied when sentencing: see, eg, R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67; R v Tsiarias [1996] 1 VR 398 at 400; R v Fahda [1999] NSWCCA 267 at [40] - [48]; Lauritsen v R [2000] WASCA 203; (2000) 114 A Crim R 333 at [43] - [51]; R v Harb [2001] NSWCCA 249…
Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14
Citation 46 (Para 101)

…at first instance in Cole found that the criminal history of the offender enlivened the principles enunciated in Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465.…
Neal v The Queen [1982] HCA 55
Citation 47

…stress which accounts for criminal conduct is always material to the consideration of an appropriate sentence: Neal v The Queen (1982) 149 CLR 305; [1982] HCA 55 at 324-325 (Brennan J). Motive for the commission of an offence is an important factor on sentence: Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67…

Legislation Cited

No legislation cited in this judgment.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v POUT [2020] NSWDC 751
Hearing dates:	12 November 2020
Date of orders:	15 December 2020
Decision date:	15 December 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Lerve DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence - see paragraphs [145-149]
Catchwords:	CRIME - Property offences - Break and enter dwelling house and commit serious indictable offence CRIME - Public justice offences - Threatening or intimidating victims or witnesses CRIME - Sexual offences — Sexual assault SENTENCING - Sentencing procedure - Aggregate sentences - Reasons for sentence SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence - Deterrence - Form 1 offences - Moral culpability - Multiple offences SENTENCING - Subjective considerations on sentence - Age of offender SENTENCING - Aggravating factors - Home of victim or any other person – presence of child
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 Crimes Act, 1900
Cases Cited:	Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114 Attorney General’s Application Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146. Black v R [2013] NSWCCA 265 Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215 Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 Bullock v R [2016] NSWCCA 131 Cole v R [2010] NSWCCA 227; Currie v R [2013] NSWCCA 267 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; 205 Crim R 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Dungay v R [2020] NSWCCA 209 Gore v R; Hunter v R (2010) 208 A Crim R 353 Herbert v R [2015] NSWCCA 172 Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 169 Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45 Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141 Jolly v R [2013] NSWCCA 76 Keeley v R [2014] NSWCCA 139 Locke v R (2010) 207 A Crim R 34 McCullough v R [2009] NSWCCA 94 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 Ngati v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 125 Piscitelli v R [2013] NSWCCA 8 R v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575; [2004] NSWCCA 434 R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603 R v Elyard [2006] NSWCCA 43 R v Mitchell & Gallagher (2007) 177 A Crim R 94 R v Omar [2015] NSWCCA 67 Simmons v R [2019] NSWCCA 20 Simon v R [2013] NSWCCA 328 SS v R [2016] NSWCCA 197 Stephens v R [2010] NSWCCA 93 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Zreika v R (2012) 223 A Crim R 460
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Edward POUT
Representation:	Counsel: Mr M King (for the offender) Solicitors: Ms L Hanshaw, ODPP (for the Crown)
File Number(s):	2018/254272, 2020/149616
Publication restriction:	NO PUBLICATION of the name of the complainant or anything that would tend to identify them.