R v Clarke [2022] NSWDC 503

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Clarke [2022] NSWDC 503 Hearing dates: 11 October 2022 Date of orders: 11 October 2022 Decision date: 11 October 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Grant DCJ Decision: Orders at [59] Catchwords: SENTENCING – aggravated break and enter – steal motor vehicle – vehicle a classic car – lengthy criminal history – previous convictions for like offences – planning and sophistication in the offence – Bugmy principles enlivened – some contrition and remorse – risk of institutionalisation Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Cases Cited: Attorney-General's Application (No 1); R v Ponfield (1999) 48 NSWLR 327 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Filippou v The Queen (2015) 256 CLR 47 McKillop v R [2010] NSWCCA 126 Nicholls v R [2020] NSWCCA 66 Thach v R [2018] NSWCCA 252 Category: Sentence Parties: Rex (Crown) Luke Martin Clarke (Offender) Representation: Counsel: Mr A Metcalfe (Offender)

Solicitors: Solicitor for the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Blomfield Legal (Offender) File Number(s): 2021/00251028 Publication restriction: Nil

Ex tempore JUDGMENT

Introduction 1. On 22 June 2022, the offender, Luke Martin Clarke, was arraigned on an indictment with a single count to which he pleaded guilty. The indictment reads as follows: "on or about 30 April 2021, in Leeton in the State of New South Wales, did break and enter the garage of [the complainant] situated at [the address], Leeton, and then in the said garage, did commit a serious indictable offence, namely, steal motor vehicle, in circumstances of aggravation, namely, being in company with [Bradley James Dehommel]." 1. The offence is contrary to section 112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty is 20 years' imprisonment with a standard non-parole period of 5 years' imprisonment. The maximum penalty and standard non-parole period are important guideposts in the assessment of sentence. A sentencing judge should steer by, but not aim for them.