R v Bruno PAMPUSA [2009] NSWDC 240

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: R v Bruno PAMPUSA [2009] NSWDC 240

JUDGMENT DATE: 24 July 2009

JURISDICTION: District Court of New South Wales

JUDGMENT OF: Cogswell SC DCJ

DECISION: Non-parole period of 2 years. Balance of term of 1 year. Conditions of parole - upon release Mr Pampusa is to be brought to the of the Probation and Parole Service nearest to where he is living and subject himself to supervision. He is to accept all of their reasonable reccomendations and directions, especially with regard to drug rehabilitation and counselling.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - plea of guilty - break enter and steak - long criminal history of similar offences - in custody for similar offence at time of sentence - financial difficulties - remorse - rehabilitation in context of previously transient lifestyle - whether sentence should be concurrent with current sentence

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 s 112(1)(a) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 s 21A

CASES CITED: Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1998) 164 CLR 465

PARTIES: Regina Bruno Pampusa

FILE NUMBER(S): 2009/11/0375

SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions Legal Aid Commission of NSW

JUDGMENT

1. Bruno Pampusa has been charged with one count of break and enter and steal. That is an offence against s 112(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 and carries a maximum of fourteen years imprisonment.

2. Mr Pampusa has a long criminal history which includes many offences of the same kind. He has been sentenced by courts to imprisonment for this kind of offence on numerous occasions. In fact he is presently in custody under sentence imposed by the Local Court for such an offence.

3. The issues for me to consider in sentencing Mr Pampusa are raised by Mr Evenden who appears on his behalf and who points to events which have turned Mr Pampusa's life around to some extent and which should justify me in imposing a sentence for this offence which will expire - so far as the non parole period is concerned - not long after the current non parole period he is serving. But Mr Nathan who appears for the Director of Public Prosecutions acknowledges the force of the personal factors in Mr Pampusa's life but draws my attention to the need for imposing a sentence which is not completely or significantly concurrent with the penalties which he is presently serving.