Re Martyn Moore - [2019] VSC 344

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2019 0101

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

and

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by Martyn Moore

---

JUDGE:	PRIEST JA
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	22 May 2019
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	22 May 2019
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Martyn Moore
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2019] VSC 344

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Aggravated carjacking, armed robbery and other offence – Applicant an 18 year old Aboriginal with low IQ – Whether exceptional circumstances justifying bail – Whether relevantly an unacceptable risk – Bail granted on strict conditions – Bail Act 1977, ss 1B, 3AAA, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4E.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms J Swiney	Chester Metcalfe & Co
For the Respondent	Mr J D Singh	Mr John Cain, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

An application for bail

Martyn Moore, aged 18 years,[1] applies for bail.
[1]His date of birth is 28 October 2000.

The applicant has been in custody since 27 December 2018, when he was remanded on armed robbery[2] (two charges – charges 1 and 2); aggravated carjacking[3] (one charge – charge 3); aggravated burglary[4] (two charges – charges 4 and 5); common assault[5] (two charges – charges 6 and 7); burglary[6] (one charge – charge 8); theft of motor vehicle[7] (one charge – charge 9); theft[8] (one charge – charge 10); attempted theft[9] (one charge – charge 11); and handling stolen goods[10] (one charge – charge 12).
[2]Crimes Act 1958, s 75A(1).
[3]Crimes Act 1958, s 79A(1).
[4]Crimes Act 1958, s 77(1).
[5]Common assault is a crime at common law.
[6]Crimes Act 1958, s 76(1).
[7]Crimes Act 1958, s 74(1).
[8]Crimes Act 1958, s 74(1).
[9]Crimes Act 1958, ss 74(1) and 321M.
[10]Crimes Act 1958, s 88(1).

Currently, the applicant is being held at the Parkville Youth Justice Precinct (‘PYJP’), and is due to face a contested committal in the Mildura Children’s Court on 1 August 2019.

It is common ground between the parties that this Court must refuse bail unless satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist that justify the grant of bail.

The grounds upon which bail is sought are set out in the application as follows:[11]
[11]Spelling, grammar and syntax as in original.

1. The Applicant is of Aboriginal heritage, a Barkindji man who at the time of this offending was 17 years of age.
2. The Applicant is currently on remand at the Parkville Youth Justice Centre.
3. Pursuant to section 4A of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic) the Applicant must show exceptional circumstances as to why his detention in custody is not justified.
4. The Applicant is 18 years of age, having been born on the 28 October 2000.
5. The applicant does not have other outstanding criminal law matters in either Victoria or New South Wales.
6. The Applicant…

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 Re Martyn Moore

Details

AGLC: Re Martyn Moore [2019] VSC 344
Case: [2019] VSC 344
Decision Date: 22 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Martyn Moore, faced charges of aggravated carjacking, armed robbery, and other offences, in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Moore, an 18-year-old Aboriginal man with a low IQ, sought bail. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the charges and the risk of reoffending. The court needed to decide whether exceptional circumstances existed justifying bail and whether bail posed an unacceptable risk to the community.

The court examined Moore's background, including his age, intellectual disability, and the lack of prior criminal history. It also considered the severity of the alleged offences and the potential risk of reoffending. The court concluded that exceptional circumstances existed due to Moore's age and intellectual disability. It found that, while the offences were serious, bail could be granted with strict conditions to mitigate the risk of reoffending and ensure community safety.

Moore was granted bail on strict conditions, including electronic monitoring, a curfew, and a requirement to reside at a specified address. The court emphasised the need for strict adherence to these conditions to manage the risk posed by Moore. The court's decision balanced Moore's rights with the need to protect the community, recognising the importance of tailored bail conditions in such cases.

Orders