R v Sean Hollis - [2019] NSWDC 139

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Sean Hollis [2019] NSWDC 139
Hearing dates: 22 February 2019; 1 March 2019
Date of orders: 01 March 2019
Decision date: 01 March 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Sentence: Aggregate sentence four years and one month. Non parole period two years and one month.

Catchwords: SENTENCING – a police pursuit – reckless driving – a disturbing incident outside Wollongong hospital – knife and flammable liquids used to prevent apprehension – police assaulted – police vehicles damaged – police dog deployed – police negotiations fail – fire hose deployed – police show extraordinary restraint – offender placed in induced coma – objectively serious offending – significant risk to police and public – maximum penalties considered – early guilty plea – aggregate sentence – mentally ill offender – mental illness defence not raised – family support – offender gives evidence – deprived background – abuse and drug use – extensive criminal history – long period of non-offending – resumption of illicit drug use – regret – moral responsibility low – treatment plan – need for Community Treatment Order – purposes of sentencing.
Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987
Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited: Attorney General's Application No 2 of 2002 [2002]137 A Crim R 196
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195; 172 A Crim R 371
DPP v De Le Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Category: Sentence
Parties: Sean Hollis (Offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr P Townsend (for the Offender)
Ms T Lasschuit (for the Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2018/00091499

Judgment – Ex TEMPORE REVISED

On the evening of Sunday 18 March 2018, a silver Ford Falcon sedan, with no registration plates, was seen being driven in a dangerous manner North through the Kiama bends.
Police were alerted and a marked police car, travelling northbound at Albion Park Rail, saw, followed and ultimately, pursued the vehicle. At the time the police commenced their pursuit, the Ford Falcon was travelling at 100 kilometres in the 100 kilometre per hour zone.
The Ford Falcon approached Albion Park Rail. It indicated a left‑hand turn and slowed down on the shoulder, but as the police slowed behind it, the Ford Falcon drove off at speed through the Albion Park town area. It was travelling at estimated speeds of over 120 kilometres per hour in that 70 kilometre zone. The Ford Falcon went through Albion Park Rail, along the Princes Highway, before entering the Princes Motorway (M1) at Yallah. At times it reached an estimated speed of 150 – 160 kilometres per hour in that 100 kilometre zone. Other times it was said to be at 160 kilometres per hour. It overtook a vehicle on the shoulder. There are the police pursuit and drive recklessly matters: sequence 3 and sequence 4.
The Ford Falcon then went up the off-ramp at West Wollongong, and although it slowed…

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 Sean Hollis

Details

AGLC: R v Sean Hollis [2019] NSWDC 139
Case: [2019] NSWDC 139
Decision Date: 01 March 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Sean Hollis involved the defendant, who had engaged in a dangerous police pursuit, culminating in a disturbing incident outside Wollongong hospital. The defendant used a knife and flammable liquids to prevent his apprehension, assaulted police officers, damaged police vehicles, and resisted arrest to the extent that a police dog was deployed and negotiations failed, necessitating the use of a fire hose. Despite the serious nature of the offence, the police displayed extraordinary restraint, and the defendant was eventually placed in an induced coma. The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence, considering the maximum penalties, the defendant’s early guilty plea, the need for an aggregate sentence, his mental illness, deprived background, extensive criminal history, and periods of non-offending behaviour.

The legal issues before the court included whether the defendant's actions constituted objectively serious offending, the significant risk posed to police and the public, the consideration of maximum penalties, the impact of an early guilty plea, the formulation of an aggregate sentence, and the relevance of the defendant's mental health and background. The court also had to assess the defendant's moral responsibility, the need for a treatment plan, and whether a Community Treatment Order was warranted in light of the purposes of sentencing.

In delivering the judgment, the court emphasised the seriousness of the defendant’s actions, which posed a significant risk to police and the public. The court acknowledged the defendant’s early guilty plea and his extensive criminal history but also considered his deprived background, abuse, drug use, and periods of non-offending behaviour. The court found the defendant's moral responsibility to be low but recognised his regret and the need for a treatment plan. The court concluded that an aggregate sentence was appropriate and imposed a sentence of four years and one month, with a non-parole period of two years and one month. The court considered the need for a Community Treatment Order to ensure the defendant's rehabilitation and to protect the community.

The court's final orders were that the defendant, Sean Hollis, be sentenced to an aggregate term of four years and one month, with a non-parole period of two years and one month. The court also considered the need for a Community Treatment Order to facilitate the defendant's treatment and rehabilitation, and to address the risk he posed to the community.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentence: Aggregate sentence four years and one month. Non parole period two years and one month.

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 Sean Hollis [2019] NSWDC 139
Hearing dates:	22 February 2019; 1 March 2019
Date of orders:	01 March 2019
Decision date:	01 March 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentence: Aggregate sentence four years and one month. Non parole period two years and one month.
Catchwords:	SENTENCING – a police pursuit – reckless driving – a disturbing incident outside Wollongong hospital – knife and flammable liquids used to prevent apprehension – police assaulted – police vehicles damaged – police dog deployed – police negotiations fail – fire hose deployed – police show extraordinary restraint – offender placed in induced coma – objectively serious offending – significant risk to police and public – maximum penalties considered – early guilty plea – aggregate sentence – mentally ill offender – mental illness defence not raised – family support – offender gives evidence – deprived background – abuse and drug use – extensive criminal history – long period of non-offending – resumption of illicit drug use – regret – moral responsibility low – treatment plan – need for Community Treatment Order – purposes of sentencing.
Legislation Cited:	Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	Attorney General's Application No 2 of 2002 [2002]137 A Crim R 196 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195; 172 A Crim R 371 DPP v De Le Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Sean Hollis (Offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Solicitors: Mr P Townsend (for the Offender) Ms T Lasschuit (for the Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2018/00091499