Regina v Brown [2004] NSWCCA 215

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Brown [2004] NSWCCA 215 HEARING DATE(S) : 28/06/04 JUDGMENT DATE : 28 June 2004

JUDGMENT OF : Ipp JA at 1; Hulme J at 24; Hislop J at 29 DECISION : Leave to appeal granted; Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - Appeal against sentence - Guilty pleas for three robbery offences - Where offences had extremely serious consequences for victims - Where accused was young with no prior convictions - Partly principle - Whether trial judge erred in not taking the regret and remorse of the accused into account - Importance of the serious criminality of the offences. PARTIES : Regina Peter Brown FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60099/04 COUNSEL : G I O Rowling (Crown) D Dalton (Applicant) SOLICITORS : S Kavanagh (Crown) S O'Connor (Applicant)

LOWER COURT District Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 03/11/0605; 03/11/0126 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT McGuire DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60099/04

IPP JA HULME J HISLOP J

Monday 28 June 2004 REGINA v PETER BROWN Judgment 1 IPP JA: This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence. 2 The applicant was convicted on his own plea of guilty of three offences. Firstly, armed robbery committed on 21 May 2002; secondly, robbing one Robert Lalor, in circumstances where, immediately before the robbery, he maliciously inflicted actual bodily harm on Lalor; and, thirdly, being armed with intent to commit an indictable offence, namely armed robbery. 3 The maximum penalty on the first offence was twenty years imprisonment, twenty years imprisonment on the second offence and, on the third offence, seven years imprisonment. 4 The sentencing judge, McGuire DCJ, sentenced the applicant under the third offence first. The sentence imposed was imprisonment for a fixed term of two years, the sentence to commence on 11 October 2002 and to expire on 10 October 2004. 5 His Honour then turned to the first and second offences. He sentenced the applicant on the first offence to imprisonment for a term of six years to commence on 11 October 2004 and to expire on 10 October 2010. He fixed a non-parole period of three years to commence on 11 October 2004 and to expire on 10 October 2007. In relation to the second offence, the judge sentenced the applicant to imprisonment for a term of six years to commence on 11 October 2004 and to expire on 10 October 2010 and he fixed a non-parole period of three years to commence on 11 October 2004 and to expire on 10 October 2007, when he ordered him to be eligible for release on parole. It can be seen that the sentences in respect of the first and second offences were ordered to be served concurrently. 6 The applicant was born on 12 May 1985, he was therefore seventeen years old at the time of the offences. He lived at home with his family and he was unemployed. 7 In dealing with the seriousness of the offences, the judge said that this was not a case of some callow youth performing a one-off crime. After the first robbery, the applicant was prepared to duplicate the violence involved in employing dangerous weapons to further the armed robbery ventures. 8 A very serious matter in this case is the consequences to the victims of the first and second offences perpetrated by the applicant. Mr Lalor was struck with a sledge-hammer during the course of the commission of the second offence. His wife said: "As I work in the same job, I am always frightened of strangers, or unusual incidents. I've become much more aggressive and defensive in my workplace. I cry at work for no apparent reason. I find the work so stressful now that I must drink alcohol just to go, where previously I rarely drank. This also upsets me, as I think of myself as an alcoholic, that is, I have no control over my drinking, where previously I drank only when I chose to … I never leave the house except for work or my husband's many doctors' appointments (at least three per week). I never socialise … I am depressed and think often of suicide but I am responsible for many people and have no options. As I earn less than $14 per hour, and am now the only breadwinner in my large family, I have no choice but to keep working in a job that makes me feel constantly threatened by people who choose to make money by damaging others."