R v Roberts - [2011] NSWDC 212

District Court

New South Wales

Case Title: R v ROBERTS

Medium Neutral Citation: [2011] NSWDC 212

Hearing Date(s): 3 November 2011

Decision Date: 03 November 2011

Jurisdiction: Criminal

Before:
Berman SC DCJ

Decision:
Referred for assessment as to his suitability to serve sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW - Judgement - Sentence Hearing - Cultivate a commercial quantity of prohibited plant by indoor means - Cannabis - Possess LSD - Using electricity without authority - Interfering with network operators - Possess protected fauna - Form 1 - Assessment for suitability to serve sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order

Legislation Cited:

Cases Cited:

Texts Cited:

Category: Sentence

Parties:
The Crown
Gareth Llewellyn Kidd Roberts

Representation

- Counsel:
Mr R. Nicol - The Offender

- Solicitors:
The Director of Public Prosecutions
Crawford and Duncan Lawyers

File number(s): 2010/408299

Publication Restriction:

JUDGMENT

HIS HONOUR: Gareth Llewellyn Roberts appears for sentence today on a number of matters; cultivate a commercial quantity of prohibited plant by indoor means; supply prohibited drug (namely some cannabis); possess some LSD, as well as a number of matters on the Form 1 which are to be taken into account for the cultivate offence; using electricity without authority, interfering with network operators, and possessing a protected fauna (relating to a snake), which Mr Roberts had in his possession, that snake not being registered.
The number of offences and their seriousness is immediately suggestive of the need to impose on Mr Roberts a sentence of some severity.
The offences were detected when police went to his home on 7 December 2010, armed with a search warrant. They knocked on the door. Mr Roberts opened it. Police immediately smelled a strong odour of cannabis. The offender took them to a rear door that appeared to go under the house, he used a key pad to open the door and once inside police located three separate rooms, each containing growing cannabis plants and sophisticated equipment used for its cultivation. There were 119 cannabis plants in one room, twenty-one in the second room, and forty-five in the third room, thus there was a total of 185 cannabis plants found.
As well as the growing plants, there was a significant quantity of cannabis; 3.8 kilograms in fact. Police also discovered two sheets of coloured cardboard, segregated into small squares, which on analysis were found to contain LSD,
The offender made admissions to the police about cultivating the cannabis plants, bypassing the electricity supply, and his knowledge of the loose cannabis about the premises. He was taken to the police station and has remained in custody since that date.
Mr Roberts is twenty-five years of age. He had a happy childhood but matters started to go downhill in a number of areas, particularly after his father was diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer's disease. His father died in February 2010, but leading up to his unfortunate death his behaviour deteriorated, which caused a great deal of distress in the family…

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 Roberts

Details

AGLC: R v Roberts [2011] NSWDC 212
Case: [2011] NSWDC 212
Decision Date: 03 November 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Roberts was heard in a court of criminal jurisdiction. The defendant, Roberts, was charged with cultivating a commercial quantity of a prohibited plant by indoor means, possessing LSD, using electricity without authority, interfering with network operators, and possessing protected fauna. The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence for Roberts following his guilty plea to these charges. The primary legal issues were the appropriate penalty for the cultivation of a commercial quantity of a prohibited plant, the possession of LSD, the use of electricity without authority, interference with network operators, and possession of protected fauna.

In determining the appropriate sentence, the court considered the severity and circumstances of each offence. Roberts' cultivation of a commercial quantity of a prohibited plant was deemed serious due to the large scale and indoor nature of the operation. The possession of LSD and the use of electricity without authority were also considered significant, particularly given the potential harm to the community and the electricity providers. The interference with network operators was viewed as a deliberate attempt to avoid detection and prosecution, while the possession of protected fauna highlighted a disregard for wildlife protection laws. The court weighed these factors in determining a suitable penalty.

The court found that Roberts was suitable for an Intensive Correction Order, considering the nature of his offending and his background. An Intensive Correction Order is a form of community-based sentencing that involves a structured program designed to address the offender's offending behaviour and reduce the likelihood of reoffending. The court referred Roberts for assessment to determine if he was suitable to serve his sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order.

The court made an order that Roberts be referred for assessment as to his suitability to serve his sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order. This decision reflects the court's consideration of the seriousness of Roberts' offences and the potential for rehabilitation through a structured program.

Orders

Orders of the court

Referred for assessment as to his suitability to serve sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order

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.

Case Title:	R v ROBERTS
Medium Neutral Citation:	[2011] NSWDC 212
Hearing Date(s):	3 November 2011
Decision Date:	03 November 2011
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	Referred for assessment as to his suitability to serve sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - Judgement - Sentence Hearing - Cultivate a commercial quantity of prohibited plant by indoor means - Cannabis - Possess LSD - Using electricity without authority - Interfering with network operators - Possess protected fauna - Form 1 - Assessment for suitability to serve sentence by way of an Intensive Correction Order
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Texts Cited:
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Gareth Llewellyn Kidd Roberts
Representation
- Counsel:	Mr R. Nicol - The Offender
- Solicitors:	The Director of Public Prosecutions Crawford and Duncan Lawyers
File number(s):	2010/408299
Publication Restriction: