R v Rufeal Meskele - [2021] NSWDC 704

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Rufeal Meskele [2021] NSWDC 704
Hearing dates: 25 June, 08 October and 19 November 2021
Date of orders: 09 December 2021
Decision date: 09 December 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Hatzistergos DCJ
Decision:
See [95]

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW –– Joint criminal enterprise – Break and enter – Co-offenders plan to invade the home of a drug dealer – Upon realising the wrong home has been invaded the co-offenders pursue to rob the home occupants – use of dangerous weapons
SENTENCE –– Fact finding – Offender’s role in the joint criminal enterprise – Offender sentenced on basis of lesser role in the joint criminal enterprise – Offending found to be within the mid-range of objective seriousness – Aggravating factors – Offence committed in company – Threatened use of violence – Offending occurred in the home of the victim
SENTENCE –– Remorse not established – Offender does not possess a significant prior record – Offender found to be a medium risk of re-offending with reasonable prospects of rehabilitation – COVID-19 and its impacts on inmates taken into account by the Court – Parity considered by virtue of sentences imposed on other co-offenders in the joint criminal enterprise

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 97 112, 113
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) s 276
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 5, 21A, 30E

Cases Cited:
Corda v R [2014] NSWCCA 281
Dougan v R (2006) A Crim R 135
Hamze v R [2006] NSWCCA 36
Huynh v R [2006] NSWCCA 224
Makrynikos v R [2006] NSWCCA 170
Marshall v R [2007] NSWCCA 24
R v Duffy (2014) 297 FLR 359
R v Wong [2003] NSWCCA 247
Shortland v R [2013] NSWCCA 4
Toller v R [2021] NSWCCA 204

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (the Crown)
Rufeal Meskele (the Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr T. Buckingham (trial advocate for the Crown)
Ms F. Jowett (for the Offender)
Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions (the Crown)
Aspire Law Group (the Offender)

File Number(s): 2019/348562
Publication restriction: Section 15A of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) applies. The following pseudonyms will be used: A, B and S are references to the co-offenders.

Judgment

On 27 April 2021, following a trial of some 6 days a jury found the Offender guilty on each of the following charges:

On 30 June 2019, at Blacktown in the State of New South Wales, did break and enter the dwelling-house of Patricia Laurence situate at [redacted], and therein robbed Mark Morgan of his mobile phone, money and a watch, in circumstances of aggravation, namely, being in company with [B] and others.

This is an offence contrary to section 112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (the 1900 Act) and carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment with a standard non-parole period of 5 years imprisonment.

On 30 June 2019, at Blacktown in the State of New South Wales, did rob Sharon Laurence of her mobile phone and…

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 Rufeal Meskele

Details

AGLC: R v Rufeal Meskele [2021] NSWDC 704
Case: [2021] NSWDC 704
Decision Date: 09 December 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Rufeal Meskele, the defendant and his co-offenders entered a home under the mistaken belief that it belonged to a drug dealer. Upon realising their error, they proceeded to rob the occupants using dangerous weapons. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The court was tasked with determining the defendant's role in the joint criminal enterprise, the seriousness of the offence, and the appropriate sentence considering various factors, including the impact of COVID-19 on the prison system and the sentences of co-offenders.

The primary legal issues before the court were the extent of the defendant's involvement in the criminal enterprise, the objective seriousness of the crime, and the mitigating and aggravating factors to be considered during sentencing. The court had to assess whether the defendant demonstrated remorse, the risk of re-offending, and the prospects of rehabilitation. Additionally, the court needed to ensure parity with sentences imposed on other co-offenders.

The court found that the defendant played a lesser role in the joint criminal enterprise, and the offence fell within the mid-range of objective seriousness. Aggravating factors included the offence being committed in company, the use of dangerous weapons, and the occurrence in the victim's home. The defendant did not exhibit remorse, had no significant prior record, and was assessed as a medium risk of re-offending with reasonable prospects of rehabilitation. The court also considered the impact of COVID-19 on the prison system. The final sentence took into account the sentences of other co-offenders to ensure parity.

The court ordered that Rufeal Meskele be sentenced on the basis of his lesser role in the joint criminal enterprise, with consideration of all mitigating and aggravating factors. The specific sentence was detailed in the court's final orders at paragraph [95].

Orders

Orders of the court

See [95]

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 Rufeal Meskele [2021] NSWDC 704
Hearing dates:	25 June, 08 October and 19 November 2021
Date of orders:	09 December 2021
Decision date:	09 December 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Hatzistergos DCJ
Decision:	See [95]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW –– Joint criminal enterprise – Break and enter – Co-offenders plan to invade the home of a drug dealer – Upon realising the wrong home has been invaded the co-offenders pursue to rob the home occupants – use of dangerous weapons SENTENCE –– Fact finding – Offender’s role in the joint criminal enterprise – Offender sentenced on basis of lesser role in the joint criminal enterprise – Offending found to be within the mid-range of objective seriousness – Aggravating factors – Offence committed in company – Threatened use of violence – Offending occurred in the home of the victim SENTENCE –– Remorse not established – Offender does not possess a significant prior record – Offender found to be a medium risk of re-offending with reasonable prospects of rehabilitation – COVID-19 and its impacts on inmates taken into account by the Court – Parity considered by virtue of sentences imposed on other co-offenders in the joint criminal enterprise
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 97 112, 113 Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) s 276 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 5, 21A, 30E
Cases Cited:	Corda v R [2014] NSWCCA 281 Dougan v R (2006) A Crim R 135 Hamze v R [2006] NSWCCA 36 Huynh v R [2006] NSWCCA 224 Makrynikos v R [2006] NSWCCA 170 Marshall v R [2007] NSWCCA 24 R v Duffy (2014) 297 FLR 359 R v Wong [2003] NSWCCA 247 Shortland v R [2013] NSWCCA 4 Toller v R [2021] NSWCCA 204
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (the Crown) Rufeal Meskele (the Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr T. Buckingham (trial advocate for the Crown) Ms F. Jowett (for the Offender) Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (the Crown) Aspire Law Group (the Offender)
File Number(s):	2019/348562
Publication restriction:	Section 15A of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) applies. The following pseudonyms will be used: A, B and S are references to the co-offenders.