Legal Research
Cases
R v Steele (No 2)

R v Steele (No 2)

Case [2023] NSWDC 99 3 February 2023

Aggravated Break and enter & commit serious indictable offence

Sentencing

Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO (Domestic)

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Steele (No 2) [2023] NSWDC 99
Hearing dates: 3 February 2023
Date of orders: 3 February 2023
Decision date: 03 February 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Judgement - Related summary matters after trial
Sentence - Aggregate sentence of 3 years 9 months with a non-parole period of 2 years 5 months.

Catchwords:
CRIME – Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm (domestic) - Aggravated Break and enter & commit serious indictable offence - Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO (Domestic)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Back up and related offences - judgment
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – sentence after trial - domestic violence offending – victim impact -

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Public Health Act2010 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Browning v R [2015] NSWCCA 147
Cahyadi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1
Campbell v R [2014] NSWCCA 102
Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120;
[2011] HCA 39
Munda v Western Australia (2103} 243 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38
Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26
R v Burton [2008] NSWCCA 128
R v Herring (1956) 73 WN (NSW) 203
R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704
R v Steele [2022] NSWDC 603
R v Windle [2012] NSWCCA 222
Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267; [2001] HCA 21
Suksa-Ngacharoen v R [2018] NSWCCA 142
The Queen v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48

Category: Sentence
Parties: Benjamin Steele (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr J Lang (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Bannisters, Lawyers (for the offender)
Mr A Tonks (for Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2021/00221485, 2021/00221486

sentence – ex tempore revised

Judgment - Back up and related offences

On 2 December 2022, after a trial by judge alone at Bega District Court, I convicted Benjamin Steele of three serious criminal offences: R v Steele [2022] NSWDC 603. They are for sentence today. There remains a number of summary matters that came to this Court pursuant to s 166 Criminal Procedure Act 1986.
Backup charges - sequences 1, 8 and 10, are withdrawn in the light of my findings at trial.
Sequence 5 is a COVID related, Public Health Act2010 offence. A plea of guilty was entered, consistent with admissions made by Mr Steele at trial. In all of the circumstances although I record a conviction for that matter, I deal with it pursuant to s 10(A) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure Act) 1999. No punishment, other than the conviction, is required.
Sequences 2 and 3, relate to an incident recounted by the complainant at the trial, said to have occurred at Casula. Pleas of not guilty are entered. As is evident from…

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 Steele (No 2)

Details

AGLC: R v Steele (No 2) [2023] NSWDC 99
Case: [2023] NSWDC 99
Decision Date: 03 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Steele, faced the court in R v Steele (No 2) following a series of domestic-related offences, including stalking, aggravated break and enter, and breaching an apprehended violence order (AVO). The case was heard in the higher court following a trial. The primary issues before the court were the appropriate sentencing for these serious offences, considering the domestic violence context, and the impact on the victim. Additionally, the court had to consider the need to ensure deterrence and denunciation in sentencing.

The court addressed the gravity of the offences, emphasising the repetitive and escalating nature of the defendant's actions towards the victim. It noted that the offences occurred despite the existence of an AVO, highlighting a disregard for legal constraints designed to protect the victim. The court also considered the significant impact on the victim, who suffered considerable emotional and psychological harm. In determining the sentence, the court balanced the need for punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation, while also taking into account the defendant's background and circumstances.

After weighing all relevant factors, the court concluded that an aggregate sentence of three years and nine months was appropriate, with a non-parole period of two years and five months. This sentence aimed to provide sufficient punishment and deterrence while also considering the need to protect the community and provide the victim with a sense of justice and closure. The court's decision reflected a comprehensive assessment of the offences, the defendant's culpability, and the broader implications for domestic violence prevention and victim support.

Orders

Orders of the court

Judgement - Related summary matters after trial

Sentence - Aggregate sentence of 3 years 9 months with a non-parole period of 2 years 5 months.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Steele (No 2) [2023] NSWDC 99

Cases citing this decision · 0 of 0 shown

No citing cases yet.

Cases cited in this decision · 16 of 16 shown

R v Steele
[2022] NSWDC 603 Para 1

…On 2 December 2022, after a trial by judge alone at Bega District Court, I convicted Benjamin Steele of three serious criminal offences: R v Steele [2022] NSWDC 603. They are for sentence today. There remains a number of summary matters that came to this Court pursuant to s 166 Criminal Procedure Act 1986.…
Suksa-Ngacharoen v R
[2018] NSWCCA 142 Para 6

…contravention of Apprehended Violence Orders. The general practice is that independent sentences be imposed for breach matters: Suksa-Ngacharoen v R [2018] NSWCCA 142 at [132]. As I will be sentencing for the breach of apprehended violence orders, I need to be particularly careful that I not double count as a facto…
Cherry v R
[2017] NSWCCA 150 Para 42

…he sentences, with greater weight to specific deterrence, general deterrence, and denunciation: Browning v R [2015] NSWCCA 147 at [4]-[9]; Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150. But care has to be taken. I am being asked to deal with the breach offences and impose, or indicate, separate sentences for them. When I take into a…
R v Kilic
[2016] HCA 48

…teele [2022] NSWDC 603 R v Windle [2012] NSWCCA 222 Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267; [2001] HCA 21 Suksa-Ngacharoen v R [2018] NSWCCA 142 The Queen v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48 Category: Sentence Parties: Benjamin Steele (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions Representation: Counsel: Mr J Lang (for…
Browning v R
[2015] NSWCCA 147 Para 42

…that greater weight has to be given to the sentences, with greater weight to specific deterrence, general deterrence, and denunciation: Browning v R [2015] NSWCCA 147 at [4]-[9]; Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150. But care has to be taken. I am being asked to deal with the breach offences and impose, or indicate, separa…
R v Campbell
[2014] NSWCCA 102 Para 28

…hat was done. That is my findings are fact. But an assessment of objective seriousness assessment is critical to the sentencing process: Campbell v R [2014] NSWCCA 102 at [27].…
Munda v Western Australia
[2013] HCA 38

…rkarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Munda v Western Australia (2103} 243 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v Burton [2008] NSWCCA 128 R v Herring (1956) 73 WN (NSW) 203 R v Simpson [2001] N…
R v Windle
[2012] NSWCCA 222 Para 73

…tation offenders will suffer punishment, and that offences such as this will merit severe punishment: Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267; R v Windle [2012] NSWCCA 222. A proper sentence marks the Court’s view of the seriousness of the crime and should let this offender and others know what will happen if they commi…
Muldrock v The Queen
[2011] HCA 39

…014] NSWCCA 102 Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Munda v Western Australia (2103} 243 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v Burton [2008] NSWCCA 128 R v Herrin…
R v Burton
[2008] NSWCCA 128 Para 26

…led, each offence was part of a larger picture of physical and mental violence in which the offender exercised power and control over her: R v Burton [2008] NSWCCA 128 at [97]: The Queen v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; (2016) 259 CLR 256 (2016) 91 ALJR 131.…
Cahyadi v R
[2007] NSWCCA 1 Para 70

…and appropriate to the total criminality involved: Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26. Mc Hugh J at 307-308; Cahyadi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1.…
Markarian v The Queen
[2005] HCA 25

…CA 147 Cahyadi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1 Campbell v R [2014] NSWCCA 102 Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Munda v Western Australia (2103} 243 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295…
R v Simpson
[2001] NSWCCA 534 Para 72

…um term for which the offender should be imposed must properly reflect the gravity of his offending and the other purposes of sentencing: R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 at [59].…
Ryan v The Queen
[2001] HCA 21

…203 R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 R v Steele [2022] NSWDC 603 R v Windle [2012] NSWCCA 222 Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267; [2001] HCA 21 Suksa-Ngacharoen v R [2018] NSWCCA 142 The Queen v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48 Category: Sentence Parties: Benjamin Steele (the offender) Directo…
Regina v Simpson
[1999] NSWCCA 367 Para 72

…he offender should be imposed must properly reflect the gravity of his offending and the other purposes of sentencing: R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 at [59].…
Postiglione v the Queen
[1997] HCA 26 Para 70

…tion of all the sentences to be indicated must be just and appropriate to the total criminality involved: Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26. Mc Hugh J at 307-308; Cahyadi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 5

Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW)
1 mention
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 12)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
1 mention
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Public Health Act 2010 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 3)

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Steele (No 2) [2023] NSWDC 99
Hearing dates:	3 February 2023
Date of orders:	3 February 2023
Decision date:	03 February 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Judgement - Related summary matters after trial Sentence - Aggregate sentence of 3 years 9 months with a non-parole period of 2 years 5 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME – Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm (domestic) - Aggravated Break and enter & commit serious indictable offence - Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO (Domestic) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Back up and related offences - judgment SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – sentence after trial - domestic violence offending – victim impact -
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Public Health Act2010 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Browning v R [2015] NSWCCA 147 Cahyadi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1 Campbell v R [2014] NSWCCA 102 Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Munda v Western Australia (2103} 243 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v Burton [2008] NSWCCA 128 R v Herring (1956) 73 WN (NSW) 203 R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 R v Steele [2022] NSWDC 603 R v Windle [2012] NSWCCA 222 Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267; [2001] HCA 21 Suksa-Ngacharoen v R [2018] NSWCCA 142 The Queen v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Benjamin Steele (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr J Lang (for the offender) Solicitors: Bannisters, Lawyers (for the offender) Mr A Tonks (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2021/00221485, 2021/00221486