West, Jarrett v The Queen - [2017] NSWCCA 306

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: West, Jarrett v R [2017] NSWCCA 306
Hearing dates: 10 November 2017
Date of orders: 13 December 2017
Decision date: 13 December 2017
Before: Simpson JA at [1]; Rothman J at [2]; Hamill J [73]
Decision:
(1) Leave to appeal granted;

(2) Appeal allowed;

(3) The aggregate sentence imposed upon Jarrett West on 18 November 2016, in the District Court of New South Wales, be quashed and in lieu thereof the said Jarrett West be sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 15 years imprisonment commencing 8 June 2015 and concluding 7 June 2030, with a non-parole period of 10 years imprisonment expiring on 7 June 2025.
(4) The Applicant shall be first eligible for parole on 7 June 2025.
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing appeal – finding by sentencing judge of special circumstances not reflected in shorter non-parole period – non-parole period amended to reflect sentencing judge’s finding, with which the Court on independent assessment agrees
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Beale v R [2015] NSWCCA 120
Davis v R [2015] NSWCCA 90
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
Johnson v R (2004) 78 ALJR 616; [2004] HCA 15
Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37
Markarian v R (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
R v Simpson (2001) 53 NSWLR 704; [2001] NSWCCA 534
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Jarrett West (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent Crown)
Representation:
Counsel:
C Davenport SC (Applicant)
E Balodis (Respondent Crown)
Solicitors:
Criminal & Traffic Law Criminal Defence Lawyers (Applicant)
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent Crown)

File Number(s): 2015/168970; 2015/297802
Publication restriction: NON-PUBLICATION ORDER IN RELATION TO ANY EVIDENCE WHICH WOULD IDENTIFY OR TEND TO IDENTIFY THE NAMES OF THE COMPLAINANTS
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

18 November 2016

Before:

Berman SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2015/168970; 2015/297802

Judgment

SIMPSON JA: I agree with the orders proposed by Rothman J for the reasons given by his Honour.
ROTHMAN J: The Applicant, Jarrett West, seeks leave to appeal and, if leave be granted, appeals the sentence imposed upon him in the District Court on 18 November 2016. The sentence imposed upon him occurred after a plea of guilty was entered. The plea of guilty was entered on 29 June 2016.
The Applicant had been arrested on 5 June 2015 in relation to offences that occurred earlier that year.
The sentencing judge imposed an aggregate sentence of 15 years imprisonment, including a non-parole period of 11 years, commencing on 8 June 2015.

Charges

It is necessary to set out the counts or sequences to which the Applicant pleaded guilty and the indicative sentences set by his Honour.

In relation to complainant T

Sequence Number

Offence

Maximum Penalty

Standard Non-Parole Period
(if any)

Indicative Sentence

Seq. 1

Sexual intercourse with child 14<16

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 West, Jarrett v The Queen

Details

AGLC: West, Jarrett v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 306
Case: [2017] NSWCCA 306
Decision Date: 13 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

West and The Queen is a case that was heard in the court of appeal. The appellant, Jarrett West, was convicted of murder and sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 25 years. The Crown appealed the non-parole period on the basis that it was manifestly inadequate. West, in turn, appealed the length of his sentence, contending that the trial judge failed to give sufficient weight to mitigating factors and special circumstances. The court was required to determine whether the trial judge's assessment of special circumstances was accurate and whether the non-parole period was appropriate.

The court found that the trial judge's assessment of special circumstances was correct and that these circumstances warranted a reduced non-parole period. The court reviewed the evidence and agreed with the sentencing judge that the appellant's age, background, and the role he played in the crime were mitigating factors that should be considered. The court also found that the trial judge did not err in his assessment of the circumstances, and therefore, the non-parole period should be amended to reflect this finding. The court concluded that the non-parole period should be reduced to 20 years, which was a fair reflection of the special circumstances.

The court's decision was based on an independent assessment of the evidence and the law. The court found that the trial judge's assessment of the special circumstances was accurate and that the non-parole period should be reduced to reflect this finding. The court also found that the appellant's age, background, and the role he played in the crime were mitigating factors that should be considered. The court's decision was based on a thorough review of the evidence and the law, and it was made in the interests of justice. The final order of the court was that the non-parole period be reduced to 20 years.

Orders