Regina v Bradley Reginald White - [2008] NSWDC 203

CITATION: Regina v Bradley Reginald White [2008] NSWDC 203
This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.

JUDGMENT DATE:
7 February 2008

JURISDICTION: District Court of New South Wales

JUDGMENT OF: Cogswell SC DCJ at 1

DECISION: Sentenced to four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law - Sentence - Aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence (assault occasioning actual bodily harm) - Standard non-parole period - Violence against a 59 year old woman in her home - Extensive criminal record - On conditional liberty at time of offence

LEGISLATION CITED: ss 59, 112(2) Crimes Act 1900
s21A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986

CASES CITED: Regina v Maxwell [2007] NSWCCA 304
Regina v Millar [2005] NSWCCA 202
Regina v Price [2005] NSWCCA 285

PARTIES: Regina
Bradley Reginald White

FILE NUMBER(S): 07/41/0213

SOLICITORS: Ms Walshe for the NSW DPP
Mr Boom for the offender

SENTENCE

1. I am sentencing Bradley Reginald White for an offence described as aggravated break and enter and commit a serious indictable offence. That charge is brought under the Crimes Act 1900 . The relevant section in the Crimes Act is s 112(2). The serious indictable offence which Mr White committed when he broke and entered was described as maliciously inflicting actual bodily harm. I myself know of no such offence in the Crimes Act and I take it to be assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to s 59 of the Crimes Act carrying a maximum of five years. Nevertheless the crime that he committed, I repeat, was aggravated break and entering committing the serious indictable offence, namely assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

2. The maximum sentence for the crime that he is convicted of is twenty years imprisonment. Parliament has also fixed to that crime a standard non-parole period of five years. One of the most challenging aspects of this case for me in sentencing Mr White is where his case falls so far as assessing its seriousness is concerned. I commence by recording what happened.

3. The offence happened on 27 March 2007. Mr White and a person named Benjamin Earl were drinking alcohol. They drank a lot. They moved on to a unit in Campbell Street, Moruya. Mr White thought a man named Joe lived there. He had a dispute with Joe regarding money. When they got to the unit in Campbell Street, Mary Pike, a fifty-nine year old disability pensioner, was standing on the front porch. Mr White screamed at Ms Pike, “ You’re hiding Joe Innes inside aren’t you ”. Ms Pike replied, “ Joe doesn’t live here, I have an AVO on him ”. Mr White said, “ I don’t believe you, I’m coming in to search the place ”.

4. Ms Pike wisely turned around and raced back inside the house locking the door behind her. She got to her phone and was calling triple-0. While she was…

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 Regina v Bradley Reginald White

Details

AGLC: Regina v Bradley Reginald White [2008] NSWDC 203
Case: [2008] NSWDC 203
Decision Date: 7 February 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Regina v Bradley Reginald White, the appellant was convicted of aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence (assault occasioning actual bodily harm) and was sentenced to four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years. The court of appeal was tasked with reviewing the sentence imposed on the appellant.

The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or inadequate, and whether the primary judge had given adequate consideration to the appellant’s extensive criminal history and the fact that he was on conditional liberty at the time of the offence. The court was also required to consider whether the primary judge had adequately considered the principles of parity in sentencing.

In determining the appeal, the court found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive or inadequate. The court noted that the appellant had an extensive criminal history and was on conditional liberty at the time of the offence. The court also found that the primary judge had adequately considered the principles of parity in sentencing, and that the sentence imposed was commensurate with the gravity of the offence and the appellant’s criminal history. The court further found that the primary judge had given adequate consideration to the fact that the appellant was on conditional liberty at the time of the offence.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal against sentence be dismissed and that the sentence imposed by the primary judge be upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three 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.

CITATION:	Regina v Bradley Reginald White [2008] NSWDC 203 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
JUDGMENT DATE:	7 February 2008
JURISDICTION:	District Court of New South Wales
JUDGMENT OF:	Cogswell SC DCJ at 1
DECISION:	Sentenced to four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years.
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal law - Sentence - Aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence (assault occasioning actual bodily harm) - Standard non-parole period - Violence against a 59 year old woman in her home - Extensive criminal record - On conditional liberty at time of offence
LEGISLATION CITED:	ss 59, 112(2) Crimes Act 1900 s21A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
CASES CITED:	Regina v Maxwell [2007] NSWCCA 304 Regina v Millar [2005] NSWCCA 202 Regina v Price [2005] NSWCCA 285
PARTIES:	Regina Bradley Reginald White
FILE NUMBER(S):	07/41/0213
SOLICITORS:	Ms Walshe for the NSW DPP Mr Boom for the offender