R v Zhou

Case [2020] NSWDC 266


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Zhou [2020] NSWDC 266
Hearing dates: 19 March 2020
Decision date: 19 March 2020
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Colefax SC DCJ
Decision:

Term of imprisonment of 8 years with a non parole period of 6 years. 

Catchwords: CRIME - SENTENCE - discharging a firearm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s33A(1)(a)
Category:Sentence
Parties:

Regina (Crown)

Gui Jun Zhou (Offender)
Representation:

Mr Kotsis (Crown Prosecutor)

Mr Brewer (Counsel for the offender)
File Number(s): 2017/00091952
Publication restriction: Nil

judgment

  1. Gui Jun Zhou you appear for sentence today in relation to one offence, that is discharging a firearm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. This involves a contravention of s 33A(1)(a) of the Crimes Act. The maximum penalty for that offence is twenty‑five years in prison. There is a standard non‑parole period of nine years imprisonment.

  2. You appear for sentence because a jury found you guilty of that offence in a trial which commenced on 14 August 2019.  There has been an unfortunate delay in the imposition of sentence but it is not necessary for me to go over the reasons at present. 

  3. The facts surrounding your offending can be briefly stated; and I am satisfied of these following facts beyond reasonable doubt. 

  4. On 26 March 2017 you were a few days short of your forty‑ninth birthday.  You were therefore a mature adult.  And before that date you had already acquired a significant criminal record to which I shall return. But for present purposes that criminal record included three firearms offences and you had previously been to gaol.

  5. As at March 2017 there was a young man, Fred Ushakov, who was a friend of your family.  He called you “uncle” which indicates the closeness between you and him. 

  6. Mr Ushakov, at that time, was the owner of a silver Audi motor vehicle.  Somehow (and in circumstances quite obscure) his motor vehicle came to be outside your house. You had the keys to it and it was there without Mr Ushakov’s permission. 

  7. Mr Ushakov wanted his car back and, on the date to which I have been referring, he and two of his friends went to your house to get it. 

  8. When they arrived, you were there in the backyard with a friend of yours. There was then an argument between you and your “nephew”.  He wanted his car and you said he owed you money. He denied owing you money and the argument went backwards and forwards.  Another friend of yours arrived during the course of this argument.

  9. Ultimately, Mr Ushakov decided that it was pointless continuing to argue with you and he and his friends started to leave your premises. As that happened, you somehow obtained possession of a firearm (a black pistol if memory serves me correctly); and then, at relatively close range, you fired four shots at your "nephew". One of those shots entered his body. Remnants of that bullet remain there…

Continue reading R v Zhou

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Zhou [2020] NSWDC 266
Case
[2020] NSWDC 266
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Zhou involved the defendant, Zhou, who was charged with discharging a firearm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The dispute arose in the context of a violent altercation, where Zhou had fired a shot at another individual. The matter was heard and determined in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were the appropriate sentencing principles to apply and the resultant term of imprisonment, including a non-parole period. The court had to consider the gravity of the offence, Zhou's criminal history, and any mitigating factors that might influence the sentence.

In delivering the judgment, the court meticulously examined the nature and circumstances of the offence. The court noted the seriousness of discharging a firearm in a public space, highlighting the potential for significant harm. Additionally, the court considered Zhou's previous criminal conduct, which included a history of violent behaviour. Despite acknowledging the presence of some mitigating factors, the court ultimately determined that a substantial term of imprisonment was necessary to adequately reflect the seriousness of the crime, to protect the community, and to deter future similar conduct. The court sentenced Zhou to a term of imprisonment of eight years, with a non-parole period of six years.

The court's final orders included the imposition of an eight-year imprisonment term for Zhou, with a non-parole period of six years. This sentence was reflective of the court's assessment of the offence's gravity and Zhou's criminal history, balanced against any mitigating factors.

Orders

Orders of the court

Term of imprisonment of 8 years with a non parole period of 6 years.

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.