Regina v Caine Fox - [2020] NSWDC 329

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Regina v Caine FOX [2020] NSWDC 329
Hearing dates: 16 June 2020
Date of orders: 3 July 2020
Decision date: 03 July 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Lerve DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence – see paras [63]-[67]

Catchwords:
Crime – sentencing – aggravated break enter and steal – break enter and steal – dishonestly obtain financial advantage – deal with proceeds of crime – take and drive conveyance – drive manner dangerous in police pursuit – break and enter with intent – break enter and steal – form 1 – Bugmy factors

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act, 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:
The Attorney General’s Application pursuant to s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Hampton v R [2014] NSWCCA 131
Hamilton v R [2016] NSWCCA 59
Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141
Little v R [2018] NSWCCA 63
R v Niass unrep. NSWCACA 16 Nov 1988
Refaieh v R [2018] NSWCCA 72

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Caine Fox
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr A Hanshaw for the Crown
Mr D Wilson for the Offender

File Number(s): 2019/40266
2019/57240
Publication restriction: No

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender appeared at the Local Court at Wagga Wagga on 20 March 2020 and entered pleas of guilty to a multiplicity of offending as follows:

H262471897

Sequence 3 Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence (Larcency) contrary to s 112(1) of the Crimes Act, 1900

Sequence 6 Dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage contrary to s 192E(1)(b) of the Crimes Act; and

Sequence 7 Deal with Proceeds of Crimes Contrary to s 193C(2) of the Crimes Act.

H75050519

Sequence 1 Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence (Larceny), contrary to s 112(1) of the Crimes Act;

Sequence 2 Take and Drive Conveyance Without the Consent of the Owner, contrary to s 154A(1)(a) of the Crimes Act;

Sequence 3 Drive Manner Dangerous in Police Pursuit (2^nd Offence), contrary to s 51B(1) of the Crimes Act;

Sequence 6 Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence (Larceny) contrary to s 112(1) of the Crimes Act;

Sequence 7 Break and Enter with Intent to Commit a Serious Indictable Offence contrary to s 113(1) of the Crimes Act; and

Sequence 12 Aggravated Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence (Larceny) (Aggravating circumstances being persons present) contrary to s 112(2) of the Crimes Act.

There is also a charge of driving while unlicensed attaching to a Certificate pursuant to s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1986.
The pleas of guilty were adhered to at the sentence hearing at the Wagga Wagga District Court on 5 June 2020 and accordingly the offender is entitled to the full 25% discount for the utilitarian value of the pleas of guilty.
The maximum penalty for the offences contrary to s 112(1) of the Crimes Act is 14 years imprisonment. The…

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 Caine Fox

Details

AGLC: Regina v Caine Fox [2020] NSWDC 329
Case: [2020] NSWDC 329
Decision Date: 03 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Regina v Caine Fox, the defendant was convicted of multiple offences including aggravated break enter and steal, dishonestly obtaining financial advantage, dealing with the proceeds of crime, taking and driving a conveyance, and driving in a manner dangerous during a police pursuit. The case was heard in the relevant Australian court, which did not specify its name in the text. The central legal issues revolved around the appropriate sentence for the defendant, considering the severity and nature of the crimes committed.

The court examined various factors to determine the appropriate sentence, including the Bugmy factors, which involve assessing the culpability, deterrence, and protection of the community. The court also considered the defendant's criminal history, the nature and circumstances of the offences, and the impact on the victims. Given the serious and violent nature of the crimes, the court concluded that an aggregate sentence was necessary. The court weighed the defendant's remorse, any mitigating factors, and the need to ensure public safety.

After considering all the evidence and arguments presented, the court decided on an aggregate sentence. The specifics of the sentence, including the total term and any conditions, were detailed in paragraphs [63]-[67] of the judgment. The court's decision was based on the need to adequately punish the defendant while also considering the principles of justice and rehabilitation. The final orders were made in accordance with the court's determination of the appropriate sentence.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence – see paras [63]-[67]

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:	Regina v Caine FOX [2020] NSWDC 329
Hearing dates:	16 June 2020
Date of orders:	3 July 2020
Decision date:	03 July 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Lerve DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence – see paras [63]-[67]
Catchwords:	Crime – sentencing – aggravated break enter and steal – break enter and steal – dishonestly obtain financial advantage – deal with proceeds of crime – take and drive conveyance – drive manner dangerous in police pursuit – break and enter with intent – break enter and steal – form 1 – Bugmy factors
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act, 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	The Attorney General’s Application pursuant to s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37 Hampton v R [2014] NSWCCA 131 Hamilton v R [2016] NSWCCA 59 Hunter v R [2011] NSWCCA 141 Little v R [2018] NSWCCA 63 R v Niass unrep. NSWCACA 16 Nov 1988 Refaieh v R [2018] NSWCCA 72
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Caine Fox
Representation:	Solicitors: Mr A Hanshaw for the Crown Mr D Wilson for the Offender
File Number(s):	2019/40266 2019/57240
Publication restriction:	No