REGINA v Robert Darren McLEOD [2002] NSWCA 420

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION : REGINA v Robert Darren McLEOD [2002] NSWCA 420 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 41107/02 HEARING DATE(S) : 3 December 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 3 December 2002

PARTIES : REGINA v Robert Darren McLEOD JUDGMENT OF : Mason P at 1; Meagher JA at 14; Heydon JA at 17

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER :

COUNSEL : Applicant: M Pickin Crown: T Bailey SOLICITORS : Applicant: Crown: S E O'Connor, Public Prosecutions

DECISION : Application refused.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 41107/02

MASON P MEAGHER JA HEYDON JA

Tuesday 3 December 2002

REGINA v Robert Darren McLEOD JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT - On application for bail 1 MASON P: This is an application for bail made pursuant to s 28 of the Bail Act. It was referred to this Court in accordance with the practice stated in The Queen v Masters (1992) 26 NSWLR 450. 2 The applicant is charged with an offence of aggravated robbery that occurred on 30 November 1999. It involved the taking with force of a bottle of bourbon from a liquor store, the force involved the assaulting of the man in charge of the shop. It apparently was only on 4 December 2001, when the applicant was arraigned in the District Court at Nowra, that he proffered a plea of guilty. There will still of course be a utilitarian discount but the prospects of any discount being based upon contrition or the early proffering of a plea seem to be very, very small. 3 The applicant is a man aged twenty four. He has, we are informed, spent his life residing in the Wollongong area. He has family and community ties in that area. He has a lengthy criminal record involving numerous offences involving theft, malicious damage, robbery and other offences involving violence. One of the offences involves a charge of escape. The offence in question to which he has now pleaded guilty occurred when he was on parole. 4 The matter seemed to have proceeded at a very desultory pace in the District Court. It first came before Norrish DCJ for sentencing on 15 February 2002. The sentencing proceedings were then stood over in order that the court could have the benefit of a pre-sentence report from the Probation and Parole Service. There were further adjournments. These were caused by the applicant's failure to cooperate with the Probation and Parole Service. 5 On the last day that the matter came before Norrish DCJ, being 1 November 2002, the applicant did not appear when his name was called. A bench warrant issued for his arrest. Eventually he appeared at court. The earlier order for bench warrant was revoked. His Honour received a report from the Probation and Parole officer dated 30 October 2002. The officer spoke about her inability to obtain the applicant's cooperation or attendance. There had been more than one occasion when this did not occur. The report concluded: