R v Titan Gilkes [2025] NSWSC 23

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Titan Gilkes [2025] NSWSC 23 Hearing dates: 4 February 2025 Date of orders: 7 February 2025 Decision date: 07 February 2025 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Hamill J Decision: The offender is convicted and sentenced to a non-parole period of 9 years and 6 months commencing on 25 February 2024 and expiring on 24 August 2033. There will be a balance of term of 4 years and 9 months commencing on 25 August 2033 and expiring on 24 May 2038. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – constructive murder – robbery in company whilst armed with shotgun – where offender discharged gun into front door of house – where offender unaware that victim standing close to other side of door – victim shot in leg and died en route to hospital – no intention to inflict harm, death or grievous bodily harm – assessment of objective criminality CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – where offender young, exposed to drug use and violence in his infancy and childhood and probably suffering intellectual disability – impact on sentence – where offender institutionalised – 5 months in the community between the ages of 17 and 23 – hopelessly sad personal circumstances – balancing gravity of crime and devastating impact on victim's family against compelling personal history CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – delay in charging – totality principle – unusual circumstances – where offender arrested for unrelated offending shortly after the murder – no murder charge for two years – where sentence for temporally proximate crimes served by the time of current proceedings – where further sentence required by statute to be served cumulatively – application of authority – whether backdate appropriate in circumstances – application of totality principle – better course to reduce sentence rather than back-dating in unusual circumstances of case Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 18, 18(1)(a), 97(2) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 3A, 3A(2)(eb), 3A(2)(j), 3A(3)(i), 21A, 44, 56 Cases Cited: Baumer v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 51; [1988] HCA 67 BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 159; (2010) 201 A Crim R 379 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Cahyadi v R [2007] NSWCCA 1; (2007) 168 A Crim R 41 Carr v R [2024] NSWCCA 103 Champion v R (1992) 64 A Crim R 244 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Ghamraoui v R [2009] NSWCCA 111 Lawrence v R [2023] NSWCCA 110 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59; [1988] HCA 70 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610; [1988] HCA 57 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v AD [2024] NSWSC 444 R v Cage, Lowcock & Stamp (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 718 R v DPD [2023] NSWSC 477 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255 R v Jacobs and Mehajer [2004] NSWCCA 462; (2004) 151 A Crim R 452 R v JB [1999] NSWCCA 93 R v Letteri (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 18 March 1992, unrep) R v Mills (Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW), 3 April 1995, unrep) R v Millwood [2012] NSWCCA 2 R v Shillingsworth [2023] NSWSC 453 R v Thomson & Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 R v Tiriaki [2023] NSWSC 1480 Raad v R [2011] NSWCCA 138; (2011) 220 A Crim R 471 TM v R [2023] NSWCCA 185 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14 Winchester (1992) 58 A Crim R 345 Texts Cited: N/A Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rex (Prosecution) Titan Gilkes (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: E Balodis (Rex) I Nash (Gilkes)