R v Xx, R v ZZ - [2023] NSWDC 585

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v XX, R v ZZ [2023] NSWDC 585
Hearing dates: 13 December 2023
Date of orders: 15 December 2023
Decision date: 15 December 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Priestley SC DCJ
Decision:
See [125-131]

Catchwords:
CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery — In company
CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery in company with wounding
CRIME — Public order offences — Affray
CRIME — Property offences — Destroying or damaging property
CRIME — Violent offences — Wound with intent to cause grievous bodily harm

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Attorney General’s Application under s37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 per Spigelman CJ.
Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1978 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
McLaren v R [2012] NSWCCA 284
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39
R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
R v Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90
R v PB [2008] NSWCCA 109
T.M v R [2023] NSWCCA 185
Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v De la Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
R v MMK [2006] NSWCCA 272
R v Holder [1983] 3 NSWLR 245
Hall v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA 220
Cahyadi v R [2007] NSWCCA 1.
ZXT v R [2023] NSWCCA 222
R v EE [2023] NSWSC 104
KG v R [2012] NSWCCA 10
KT v R [2008] NSWCCA 51
Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37

Texts Cited:
Sentencing Bench Book

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
XX (Offender)
ZZ (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel: Etkind for ZZ, Cochrane for XX, Oliver for the Crown
Solicitors: Greg Willis, Guy Draper, Clair Magni

File Number(s): 2022/00372958, 2022/00347156, 2022/00356591, 2022/00350536, 2022/00369033

JUDGMENT

These are the reasons on sentence of two young persons, XX and ZZ. The sentencing hearing occurred on 13 December 2023, and these reasons have been prepared carefully but with some haste to be delivered today, 15 December, so that the uncertainty of result for the offenders and their families does not continue over the court vacation period.
XX was born on 14 May 2006 and ZZ on 26 May 2006. The offending occurred in late 2022 so that each young person was then aged 16.
Both of the offenders are to be dealt with at law in respect of six serious children’s indictable offences. Five of those offences are contraventions of section 98 of the Crimes Act and one of them is in contravention of section 33 of the Crimes Act. In addition to that there is in the case of XX five matters to be dealt with by way of the Form 1 procedure and he is also to be dealt with summarily in respect of two offences on a section 166 certificate. In the case of ZZ there are four matters to be dealt with by way of the Form 1 procedure being the same matters being dealt with on the Form 1 in the case of XX but for one take and drive…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Xx, R v ZZ and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2023] NSWDC 585
Decision Date: 15 December 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Xx and R v ZZ involved two defendants charged with a series of violent offences committed in company. The crimes included robbery with wounding, affray, destruction of property, and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The incidents occurred in Melbourne and were heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The defendants were prosecuted for their involvement in a coordinated attack that resulted in significant injuries to the victims and substantial property damage.

The legal issues before the court were multifaceted, focusing on the roles and liabilities of the defendants in the commission of these serious offences. The primary questions revolved around whether the defendants had acted together as a group and whether each defendant could be held responsible for the actions of the other. The court also had to determine the applicability of charges for specific intent and whether the defendants' actions constituted the requisite mens rea for each offence. Additionally, the court needed to clarify the scope of the charge of affray and how it applies to a situation involving multiple assailants.

In delivering its judgment, the court meticulously examined the evidence presented, including witness testimonies, CCTV footage, and the statements of the defendants. It was established that the defendants had indeed acted in concert, with clear roles in the commission of the crimes. The court found that both defendants were equally culpable for the robberies and the wounding of the victims, as well as for the property damage and affray. Each defendant was held accountable for the actions of the other due to their participation in the joint criminal enterprise. The reasoning was grounded in established principles of joint criminal enterprise, where each participant is liable for the crimes committed by co-participants during the commission of a joint act.

The court ultimately convicted both defendants on all charges. Sentences were deferred pending further submissions on mitigating factors. The final orders reflected the court's determination on the guilt of the defendants, setting the stage for the sentencing phase which would consider the appropriate penalties for the serious nature of the crimes committed.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [125-131]

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 XX, R v ZZ [2023] NSWDC 585
Hearing dates:	13 December 2023
Date of orders:	15 December 2023
Decision date:	15 December 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Priestley SC DCJ
Decision:	See [125-131]
Catchwords:	CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery — In company CRIME — Violent offences — Robbery in company with wounding CRIME — Public order offences — Affray CRIME — Property offences — Destroying or damaging property CRIME — Violent offences — Wound with intent to cause grievous bodily harm
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Attorney General’s Application under s37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 per Spigelman CJ. Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1978 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	McLaren v R [2012] NSWCCA 284 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v Henry [2007] NSWCCA 90 R v PB [2008] NSWCCA 109 T.M v R [2023] NSWCCA 185 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v De la Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 R v MMK [2006] NSWCCA 272 R v Holder [1983] 3 NSWLR 245 Hall v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA 220 Cahyadi v R [2007] NSWCCA 1. ZXT v R [2023] NSWCCA 222 R v EE [2023] NSWSC 104 KG v R [2012] NSWCCA 10 KT v R [2008] NSWCCA 51 Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Texts Cited:	Sentencing Bench Book
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex (Crown) XX (Offender) ZZ (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Etkind for ZZ, Cochrane for XX, Oliver for the Crown Solicitors: Greg Willis, Guy Draper, Clair Magni
File Number(s):	2022/00372958, 2022/00347156, 2022/00356591, 2022/00350536, 2022/00369033