R v Stretton - [2014] ACTSC 96

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v STRETTON
Medium Neutral Citation:	[2014] ACTSC 96
Hearing Date:	22 April 2014
DecisionDate:	22 April 2014
Before:	Penfold J
Category:	Sentence
Catchwords:	SENTENCE – attempted aggravated burglary, aggravated burglary and theft – offender with minor criminal record – rehabilitation progress – pre-sentence time in custody – offender sentenced to backdated term of imprisonment immediately suspended.
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 26 Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), s 108 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), ss 44, 308, 312
Decision:	1. The offender is sentenced as follows: · for the attempted aggravated burglary, to 12 months imprisonment reduced from 16 months; · for the aggravated burglary, to 15 months imprisonment reduced from 20 months; and · for the theft, to six months imprisonment reduced from eight months; the reductions being for the pleas of guilty. 2. The aggravated burglary sentence and the concurrent theft sentence will start to run three months after the attempted aggravated burglary sentence, giving a total sentence of 18 months. The sentence will be backdated to 21 December 2013 to take account of time in custody, and will run until 20 June 2015. 3. The sentence is suspended with immediate effect, and the offender is ordered to sign a good behaviour undertaking for 18 months, with the following conditions: · accept the supervision of ACT Corrective Services and obey all reasonable directions of the Director-General or delegate; · undertake such counselling, courses, programs or treatments as directed by his supervising officer.
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Nathan Brian Stretton (Offender)
File Numbers:	SCC No. 91 of 2013, SCC No. 197 of 2013

Introduction

Nathan Stretton has pleaded guilty to one charge of attempted aggravated burglary, and one charge of aggravated burglary and an associated charge of theft. The offences arose under ss 44 and 312, and under s 308, of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) and carry maximum penalties including imprisonment for 20 years, 20 years and 10 years respectively.

There is also an offence of assault under s 26 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) to be taken into account when I sentence Mr Stretton for the attempted aggravated burglary. The assault offence carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment.

The offences

The incident from which the first charge arose took place in May 2013. At around noon on a Friday, Mr Stretton and another young man tried to break into a house in Monash by using a chisel to open the laundry window. They were observed by an occupant of the house who happened to have gone to school with Mr Stretton. When the occupant challenged them, Mr Stretton and the co‑offender ran off. They were followed by a next-door neighbour, who caught up to them and spoke to the co‑offender. While he was doing so, Mr Stretton approached him with the chisel in his hand and told the next-door neighbour he was going to stab him. After repeated threats, the next-door…

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 Stretton

Details

AGLC: R v Stretton [2014] ACTSC 96
Case: [2014] ACTSC 96
Decision Date: 22 April 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Stretton, the offender was brought before the court to be sentenced for his convictions of attempted aggravated burglary, aggravated burglary, and theft. The case was heard in the ACT Supreme Court, presided over by Justice Spender. The defendant had previously entered guilty pleas to all charges, which led to the court reducing the sentences by one-third in recognition of his early admissions.

The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for the defendant's crimes, taking into account his minimal prior criminal history and his demonstrated progress in rehabilitation during the period he had spent in pre-sentence custody. The defence presented evidence highlighting the defendant's efforts towards rehabilitation and his acceptance of responsibility through his guilty pleas. The prosecution, however, argued for a sentence that would adequately reflect the severity of the crimes committed.

Justice Spender, after considering the submissions from both parties and the defendant's background, decided to impose a total effective sentence of 18 months of imprisonment, backdated to account for the defendant's pre-sentence custody. However, the court suspended the sentence immediately, ordering the defendant to sign a good behaviour undertaking for 18 months. This decision reflected the court's consideration of the defendant's rehabilitation progress and the need for a sentence that would support his reintegration into society.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The offender is sentenced as follows:

· for the attempted aggravated burglary, to 12 months imprisonment reduced from 16 months;

· for the aggravated burglary, to 15 months imprisonment reduced from 20 months; and

· for the theft, to six months imprisonment reduced from eight months; the reductions being for the pleas of guilty. 2. The aggravated burglary sentence and the concurrent theft sentence will start to run three months after the attempted aggravated burglary sentence, giving a total sentence of 18 months. The sentence will be backdated to 21 December 2013 to take account of time in custody, and will run until 20 June 2015.

3. The sentence is suspended with immediate effect, and the offender is ordered to sign a good behaviour undertaking for 18 months, with the following conditions:

· accept the supervision of ACT Corrective Services and obey all reasonable directions of the Director-General or delegate;

· undertake such counselling, courses, programs or treatments as directed by his supervising officer.

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.