R v White - [2001] NSWCCA 108

CITATION: R v White [2001] NSWCCA 108

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60742/99

HEARING DATE(S): Wednesday 21 February 2001

JUDGMENT DATE:
21 February 2001

PARTIES :

Regina v John White

JUDGMENT OF: Grove J at 1; Hulme J at 32

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 99/11/0122

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL
OFFICER : Howie DCJ

COUNSEL : P.G. Berman SC (Crown)
In Person ( Applicant)

SOLICITORS: S.E. O'Connor (Crown)

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law and Procedure - Sentence - Successive Incidents Involving Robbery in Company, Stealing from the Person in Circumstances of Aggravation and Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm - Encompassing Sentence Effectively 3 Years 3 Months Minimum Term - 1 Year 9 Months Additional Term Not Excessive

DECISION: Application for Leave to Appear Granted; Appeal Dismissed

IN THE COURT OF

CRIMINAL APPEAL

60742/99

Wednesday 21 February 2001

REGINA v JOHN WHITE

JUDGMENT

1 GROVE J: This is an application by John White seeking leave to appeal against the severity of sentence imposed upon him in the District Court by his Honour Judge Howie (as he then was).

2 The applicant is an aboriginal Australian and a person of some note as a manufacturer and player of the didgeridoo. He conducts such activities under his tribal name of Jarwin Jugurmurra. He is aged forty-six years having been born on 26 May 1954.

3 Following trial before Howie DCJ and a jury, he was convicted on three counts, respectively, of robbery in company, stealing from a person in circumstances of aggravation and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The first charge related to one incident and the second and third charges related to an immediately following incident. All of these occurred on 8 December 1998 in the central business district of Sydney.

4 The applicant had been busking with his didgeridoo and had encountered a man called Curley, who was tried with him. Curley was apparently an old acquaintance of his. Regrettably, their encounter led to the consumption of a considerable amount of intoxicating liquor.

5 The busking took place at or near the Sydney Town Hall. Thereafter the applicant, in company with Mr Curley, headed up Park Street towards the Kings Cross area. The first incident occurred when they encountered a young man called Hardy. It was after midnight and Mr Hardy was a young man who had been playing that night in a band in a nearby restaurant. The facts were elaborated in considerable detail by the learned sentencing judge and I do not propose to repeat all that detail, but I would respectfully adopt what he has said. It suffices for present purposes to say that the applicant and Curley approached the young man Hardy and eventually took a small sum of money out of his pocket.

6 There was no particular violence executed upon Mr Hardy, although his Honour found that there was a threat in terms that the applicant had said to his co-offender, "Are you going to smash him or will I?" This…

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 White

Details

AGLC: R v White [2001] NSWCCA 108
Case: [2001] NSWCCA 108
Decision Date: 21 February 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v White involved the defendant, White, who faced multiple criminal charges arising from a series of incidents involving robbery, theft, and assault. The defendant was charged with robbing another person in company, stealing from the person in circumstances of aggravation, and assaulting that person, causing actual bodily harm. The matter was heard in the relevant Australian court, which was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for these serious offences.

The central legal issue the court had to address was the calculation of an appropriate sentence that would adequately reflect the seriousness of the offences while also considering the need for a fair and proportionate punishment. The court was required to consider the cumulative impact of the successive incidents and the principles of sentencing in criminal law, particularly focusing on deterrence, rehabilitation, and the protection of the community.

The court carefully considered the nature and circumstances of the offences, the defendant's criminal history, and the principles of cumulative sentencing. The court recognised the gravity of the offences, noting the escalation from robbery to assault causing actual bodily harm. After a thorough analysis, the court determined that the appropriate sentence was a total of five years, with a minimum term of three years and three months. Additionally, the court imposed an extra term of one year and nine months, which, when considered in conjunction with the overall sentence, was deemed not excessive given the circumstances. This decision was based on the need to balance the seriousness of the offences with the overarching principles of sentencing in criminal law.

Orders