R v Mather [2019] NSWDC 210

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Mather [2019] NSWDC 210 Hearing dates: 28 May 2019 Date of orders: 28 May 2019 Decision date: 28 May 2019 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Bennett SC DCJ Decision: 2 year sentence of imprisonment to be served by way of Intensive Corrections Order Catchwords: CRIME — Property offences — Break, enter and commit serious indictable offence Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Cases Cited: Attorney General's Application under S 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518 SZ v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 19 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Leanne Mather (Offender) Representation: Mr Howell (Crown) Ms Davids (Offender)

Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Chandler Legal (Offender) File Number(s): 2018/00295040 Publication restriction: Confidential portion of this judgement has been redacted in this judgement and published in a separate judgement, [2019] NSWDC 211

EX TEMPORE Judgement (REVISED) 1. ...(recording equipment not turned on).. were issued at court in respect of it and I would expect there to be no action taken in any event. 2. As noted above the recording equipment was not activated until shortly after I commenced delivery of my ex tempore judgement earlier today. The judgement was transmitted to me as a matter or priority to be perfected and available to the parties in a trial to commence on 29 May 2019 and in which the offender is to be called as a witness. 3. I have reconstructed the preliminary portion of these reasons drawing upon the material before me. 4. Leanne Mather pleaded guilty in the Local Court and was thereupon committed for sentence for an offence contrary to s 112(1) Crimes Act 1900 expressed thus: between 10:30pm on 24 April 2016 and 6:10 am on 25 April 2016 at Melrose Park, did break and enter the dwelling house of the family White and did steal adults and children/s wallets containing credit cards, handbags and a lap top computer the property of the family. The maximum penalty is imprisonment for 14 years. There is no standard non-parole period for the purposes of Part 4 Division 1A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. 5. She has adhered to the plea of guilty and asks that the court take into account nine offences of obtain property by deception contrary to s 192E(1)(a) Crimes Act, with a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 10 years, although there is no doubt that these would have otherwise been dealt with summarily exposing the offender to a maximum penalty in each case of imprisonment for two years and a fine represented by 100 penalty units. 6. The additional offences will be taken into account in accordance with the judgement of the Chief Justice in Attorney General's Application under S 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518. Although she has avoided separate punishment for these offences she has provided utility for which she must have benefit. The additional offences will require an increase in the sentence that would have been applied to the principal offence were it standing alone to reflect the need for appropriate weight to be given to personal deterrence, and to reflect the community's entitlement for retribution and denunciation for the extent of the misconduct. 7. She has spent no time in custody. 8. The offender was subject to a bond pursuant to s 10 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act at the time of the offence. I do not propose to take action in respect of it. It was all but concluded when she committed these offences.