R v HOSKINS [2020] NSWDC 315

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v HOSKINS [2020] NSWDC 315 Hearing dates: 13 February 2020 Date of orders: 20 February 2020 Decision date: 20 February 2020 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Priestley SC DCJ Decision: See orders at [58] Catchwords: CRIME — Property offences — Break and enter with intent to commit serious indictable offence CRIME — Violent offences — Assault occasioning actual bodily harm CRIME — Public order offences — Affray CRIME — Violent offences — Reckless wounding Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crime Sentencing Procedure Act 1999 (NSW) Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Offender (Hoskins) Representation: Mr Webb for the Crown Mr Bianchino for the Offender File Number(s): 2019/00035076 Publication restriction: Unrestricted

Judgment

Introduction 1. Douglas Edward Hoskins, the offender, was born on 21 March 1980 and appears today for sentence on five offences committed on 31 January 2019. He has been held in custody in respect of these matters solely from that date. There are no matters to be dealt with on a form 1, nor is there any certificate for related or backup offences. The offences are two counts of reckless wounding, one of affray, one of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and one of aggravated breaking and entering and committing a serious indictable offence, namely assault occasioning actual bodily harm. 2. The offender was committed for sentence from the Local Court so that his plea is considered to have been made at the earliest possible time which has a clear utilitarian value and will be reflected by a 25% discount on sentence. 3. I propose setting out so far as is relevant the facts of each of the five offences and assess each offences objective seriousness before then turning to subjective matters. I will deal with the offences in the order in which they occurred. I take the facts from the agreed facts document which is at tab 2 of the Crown bundle which was tendered and became exhibit A in the proceedings. 4. On the day of the offending the offender was consuming alcohol and was at a location in Coffs Harbour where he was staying at the time. The facts of these offences involve a range of people between whom there is some association either by way of acquaintance or family connection; for example one of the victims of one of the reckless wounding charges considered the offender her uncle though in fact he is the cousin of her partner. 5. In relation to all of the offences the conduct occurred either in or at the surrounds of people's homes. I have taken this fact into account, but not in respect of the s112 charge as I see this aspect as part of the elements of the charge. 6. The lead up to the first offence which is an offence of reckless wounding in breach of section 35 (4) of the Crimes Act was an argument between SW and the offender leading to the offender leaving SW's premises followed by SW hearing glass smashing and her accusing the offender of throwing a bottle at her house.