Legal Research
Cases
R v Simon

R v Simon

Case [2025] NSWSC 309 3 April 2025

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Simon [2025] NSWSC 309
Hearing dates: 07, 19 November 2024, 24 February 2025
Date of orders: 03 April 2025
Decision date: 03 April 2025
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: McNaughton J
Decision:
Mr Simon is sentenced to imprisonment for 31 years. The Court sets a non-parole period of 22 years commencing on 9 February 2023, and an additional term of 9 years commencing on 9 February 2045 and ending on 8 February 2054.

Catchwords:
CRIME – sentence – murder – plea of guilty – where victim was offender’s daughter’s partner – where conflict over property – whether sentence of life imprisonment should be imposed – whether full 25% discount for plea of guilty should be imposed – s 25F Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – where special circumstances

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 19A
Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), s 5A
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21, 25F(2), 30E, 54A, 61
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 4

Cases Cited:
Geraghty v R [2023] NSWCCA 47
Hiliv The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
Mahmoodv Western Australia (2008) 232 CLR 397
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
Ney v R [2023] NSWCCA 252
Nguyen v R [2015] NSWCCA 268
R v A1 (No. 6) [2019] NSWSC 1581
R v Harris [2000] NSWCCA 469
R v Hawkins; R v Garland (Sentence) [2024] NSWSC 80
R v Mark Lewis [2001] NSWCCA 448
RvMerritt [2004] NSWCCA 19; (2004) 59 NSWLR 557
R v Ney [2021] NSWSC 529
R v Parkes (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 910
R v Pettiford (Sentence) [2024] NSWSC 319
R v Rolfe [2017] NSWSC 1393
R v Uzabeaga [2000] NSWCCA 381
R v Weston(No 3) [2017] NSWSC 1385
R v Woods; R v Hayes; R v McLachlan; R v Harding; R v Farnsworth (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 545
Rogerson v R; McNamara v R [2021] NSWCCA 160
The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Luke Samouel Simon (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
N Marney (Crown)
I Nash (Offender)
Solicitors:
C Hyland, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
D Holles, Legal Aid NSW (Offender)

File Number(s): 2023/00044323
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

On 9 February 2023, Luke Samouel Simon, the offender, shot and killed Damien Conlon. Mr Conlon was the beloved and cherished partner of the offender’s daughter, Linda Simon. Two days earlier, on 7 February 2023, the offender had gone to his gun safe, removed a pistol, and said words to himself that were captured by CCTV including “that’s the one that is going to put him to sleep”, and “fucking Damien, you’re fucking gone”. At the time of the final, fatal, shot on 9 February 2023, the offender stated, “bye bye Damien”.
The offender…

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 Simon

Details

AGLC: R v Simon [2025] NSWSC 309
Case: [2025] NSWSC 309
Decision Date: 03 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Simon, the defendant pled guilty to the murder of his daughter's partner in a New South Wales court. The circumstances surrounding the murder involved a dispute over property, leading to the tragic death of the victim. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for the defendant, considering both the nature of the crime and the defendant's plea of guilty.

The legal issues before the court included whether the appropriate sentence for the defendant's crime was life imprisonment and whether a full 25% discount for the plea of guilty should be applied. The court examined these issues in light of the provisions of section 25F of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) and the special circumstances surrounding the case. The court also considered the nature of the relationship between the offender and the victim, which was a significant factor in the sentencing decision.

In delivering its judgment, the court determined that life imprisonment was the appropriate sentence for the defendant's crime. The court also found that the full 25% discount for the plea of guilty should not apply due to the special circumstances of the case. The court highlighted the gravity of the offence, the relationship between the offender and the victim, and the property dispute as factors that warranted a severe sentence. The court's decision was guided by the need to ensure that the sentence reflected the seriousness of the crime while also considering the mitigating factors present in the case.

The final orders of the court included a sentence of life imprisonment for the defendant, with a non-parole period to be determined by the sentencing judge. The court's decision underscored the importance of considering both the legal framework and the unique circumstances of each case when determining an appropriate sentence for serious crimes such as murder.

Orders