R v Rose
[2018] ACTSC 237
•23 May 2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Rose |
Citation: | [2018] ACTSC 237 |
Hearing Date: | 23 May 2018 |
DecisionDate: | 23 May 2018 |
Before: | Burns J |
Decision: | See [15] – [16] |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – aid and abet the commission of an offence – co-offender – offence of arson – plea of guilty after negotiations – seriousness of offence – level of involvement in offence – good prospects for rehabilitation |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Blake Rose (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel Mr J De Bruin (Crown) Mr J Lawton (Offender) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Sharman Robertson (Offender) | |
File Number: | SCC 208 of 2017 |
BURNS J
Blake Rose, you have entered a plea of guilty to one offence, alleging that on 5 May 2017 you aided and abetted the commission of an offence by Connor Jackson, namely, that he caused damage to two vehicles by fire and intended to cause or was reckless about causing damage to the vehicles.
The Statement of Facts provides a brief statement of the events. At approximately 3 am on 5 May 2017 you and Connor Jackson drove to a car park located at McClure Place in Evatt. Once at that location you located a Mitsubishi Magna belonging to your co-offender's former partner, which at that time was parked alongside of another vehicle. Your co‑offender then set fire to the Mitsubishi Magna using accelerant, causing the vehicle to be destroyed. As a result the vehicle which was parked next to that car also caught fire and suffered a degree of damage.
I accept that your involvement in this offence was significantly less than that of your co‑offender. Effectively I am satisfied that you provided him with transport to and from the scene of the offence. I am not satisfied that you were involved in any other planning with respect to the offence, which in any event, as was described by Mossop J in sentencing your co-offender, was unsophisticated.
I note that the value of the vehicle which was destroyed was some $1500.00. That is not a particularly high value for a motor vehicle, although undoubtedly it was still of significant value to its owner.
The offence of arson is always a serious offence, which is recognised by the maximum penalty prescribed for the offence, which is one of 15 years’ imprisonment, a fine of $225,000.00 or both.
The reason why arson is considered to be such a serious offence is that there is always a potential for disaster. The fire may spread, causing danger to others or damage to other property, as indeed happened on this occasion. There is always the risk of danger to others, even if it is only to those who are called upon to come and deal with the fire. As I have said, for those reasons arson is considered to be a particularly serious offence.
I note that you are 19 years old, which is a matter of some significance in sentencing. You are still relatively young. I also take into account the fact that you have no previous convictions.
The testimonials that were tendered on your behalf speak of the fact that this conduct was out of character for you. They also speak of the fact that you are remorseful and have demonstrated your remorse with respect to your offending. Indeed, I note that you have attempted to contact the owners of the vehicle to apologise for your actions.
I take into account the contents of the Pre-Sentence Report. It is of significance that you have continued family support, and also a positive peer network. These are matters which are very relevant towards rehabilitation.
10. I note that you are in stable employment. You currently reside with your parents. There are no drug or alcohol issues which need to be addressed. You were assessed as being at low risk of re-offending. I am satisfied overall that you have very good prospects for rehabilitation.
11. I note the sentence which was imposed upon your co-offender. Your co-offender, as I have already observed, was much more significantly involved in the offence. It was your co‑offender who provided the accelerant, and he also set fire to the vehicle. He was charged with two offences of arson, and on each offence he was convicted and sentenced to a period of four months’ imprisonment, which was effectively equivalent to the period that he had already spent in custody on remand.
12. I should also note that I have taken into account your plea of guilty with respect to the matter, albeit that it was not entered at the earliest opportunity. I accept that the plea came after negotiations between your counsel and the Crown relating to the appropriate charge.
13. The Crown has urged that I should impose a sentence of imprisonment, although it has not urged that it should be a sentence to be served by way of immediate and full-time imprisonment. I note that a sentence of imprisonment, even one which is a suspended sentence, should be a sentence of last resort, in the sense that it should only be imposed if no other sentence, lesser sentence, is appropriate with respect to the objective seriousness of the offence.
14. Bearing in mind your lesser involvement in this offence I am satisfied that I can deal with this matter without imposing a term of imprisonment.
Sentence
15. I record a conviction and there will be a Good Behaviour Order for a period of 12 months, commencing today, 23 May 2018.
16. There will be a condition requiring you to accept the supervision of ACT Corrective Services for that period of 12 months, or such lesser period as deemed appropriate by your supervising officer. You will be required to complete 150 hours of community service within that period of 12 months, as directed by an authorised officer.
| I certify that the preceding sixteen [16] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Burns. Associate: Date: 28 August 2018 |
0
0
0