1. Jay Ruwhiu be convicted of burglary and be sentenced to 11 months imprisonment, commencing from 2 March 2022 and expiring on 1 February 2023.
2. Jay Ruwhiu be convicted of theft and be sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, commencing from 2 September 2022 and expiring on 1 March 2023.
3. Jay Ruwhiu be convicted of aggravated robbery and be sentenced to 3 years 3 months imprisonment, commencing from 2 December 2022 and expiring on 1 March 2026.
4. I decline to make a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order under s 12A of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT).
5. I set a non-parole period of 12 months, commencing from 2 March 2022 and end on 1 March 2023.
6. I recommend that Jay Ruwhiu engage in the Solaris Therapeutic Community Program of the Alexander Maconochie Centre.
7. I recommend under s 67 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) that the Sentence Administration Board, in granting parole, make a condition that requires Jay Ruwhiu to engage in further drug rehabilitation, including, if appropriate, residential drug rehabilitation.
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – Burglary – Theft – Aggravated Robbery – Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order Application – Application Denied – Risk of Visa Cancellation – Rehabilitation – Recommended Parole Condition
[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 Ruwhiu
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Ruwhiu [2022] ACTSC 290
Case
[2022] ACTSC 290
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Jay Ruwhiu faced the ACT Magistrates Court in a criminal case involving serious charges of burglary, theft, and aggravated robbery. The defendant, Ruwhiu, contested the allegations but was ultimately found guilty on all counts. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentences for each offence and whether a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order should be imposed under the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT). Furthermore, the court needed to establish a non-parole period and recommend conditions for parole, including potential drug rehabilitation.
The court considered several legal issues, including the severity and nature of the crimes, the defendant's criminal history, and the potential for rehabilitation. Given the defendant's history of drug abuse and the risk of visa cancellation, the court had to weigh these factors against the need for public protection and deterrence. The court also evaluated the application for a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, considering the defendant's likelihood of benefiting from such treatment and the potential impact on his rehabilitation.
In delivering the judgment, the court sentenced Ruwhiu to 11 months for burglary, 6 months for theft, and 3 years 3 months for aggravated robbery, with sentences to run concurrently. The court denied the application for a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, citing insufficient evidence of the defendant's willingness to engage in treatment. A non-parole period of 12 months was set, and the court recommended participation in the Solaris Therapeutic Community Program of the Alexander Maconochie Centre. Additionally, the court recommended that parole conditions include mandatory further drug rehabilitation, potentially in a residential setting.
The final orders of the court included convictions and specific sentences for each offence, a refusal to impose a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, a non-parole period, and recommendations for parole conditions. The court's decision emphasised the importance of rehabilitation and the need for the defendant to address his drug dependency to reduce the risk of reoffending.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Jay Ruwhiu be convicted of burglary and be sentenced to 11 months imprisonment, commencing from 2 March 2022 and expiring on 1 February 2023.
2. Jay Ruwhiu be convicted of theft and be sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, commencing from 2 September 2022 and expiring on 1 March 2023.
3. Jay Ruwhiu be convicted of aggravated robbery and be sentenced to 3 years 3 months imprisonment, commencing from 2 December 2022 and expiring on 1 March 2026.
4. I decline to make a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order under s 12A of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT).
5. I set a non-parole period of 12 months, commencing from 2 March 2022 and end on 1 March 2023.
6. I recommend that Jay Ruwhiu engage in the Solaris Therapeutic Community Program of the Alexander Maconochie Centre.
7. I recommend under s 67 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) that the Sentence Administration Board, in granting parole, make a condition that requires Jay Ruwhiu to engage in further drug rehabilitation, including, if appropriate, residential drug rehabilitation.