NSW Caselaw
District Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Cook [2019] NSWDC 209 Hearing dates: 15 April 2019 Date of orders: 17 April 2019 Decision date: 17 April 2019 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Buscombe DCJ Decision: See paragraph [37] Catchwords: SENTENCING — break and enter offences — aggregate sentence of imprisonment Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 R v Ponfield (1999) 48 NSWLR 32 Category: Sentence Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Michael Stephen Cook (Offender) Representation: Solicitors: C Ervin (Crown) S Robinson (Offender) File Number(s): 2018/111126
sentence 1. The offender pleaded guilty in the Local Court and adhered to that plea before me to the following offences: that on 27 January 2018 at Strathfield he broke and entered the shop at Boddali, Symond Arcade, 11/12-14 Churchill Avenue, Strathfield and stole $120 cash, two Samsung tablets, a Gucci wallet, a men's Oroton wallet and a key. There is a further offence that on 23 January 2018 he broke and entered the office suite situated at 5/429 High Street, Penrith and stole two mobile phones valued at $250 each and a 17 inch laptop computer valued at $2,000. There is a further offence that on 23 January 2018 he broke and entered the office of Trans-Plant Training at 12/474 High Street, Penrith and stole seven laptop computers valued at $700. There is a further offence that on 30 January 2018 he broke and entered the office suite of Mark Mulock and Co at Suite 1, 374 High Street, Penrith and while in the office stole a mobile phone in a case, a set of spare keys for the office and two keycards. There is a further offence that on 29 January 2018 the offender broke and entered the office space of Nepean Therapy Dogs – a charity – at Suite 3, 374 High Street, Penrith and stole $150 from the charity cash tin and $43.50 from the petty cash tin. 2. Each of the offences is an offence under s 112(1) of the Crimes Act and has a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment. There is no applicable standard non-parole period. 3. When sentencing the offender on the offence that occurred at 5/429 High Street, Penrith he asks that I take into account a number of offences on a Form 1, being offences for which he acknowledges his guilt. Those offences are of larceny, break, enter and steal (by two) and goods in custody. Given the presence of the break, enter and steal offences on the Form 1, the offences will have an impact upon the sentence I am to impose on that offence, although it must be said the facts for those offences suggest that the offences concerned were towards the bottom of the range in relation to objective seriousness. I have taken them into account in accordance with the guideline judgement in relation to Form 1 offences.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate