R v Hamilton [2018] NSWDC 532

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hamilton [2018] NSWDC 532 Hearing dates: 19 April 2018 Date of orders: 19 April 2018 Decision date: 19 April 2018 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Buscombe DCJ Decision: See paragraph [41] Catchwords: CRIME — Property offences — Break and enter — Circumstances of aggravation — Police pursuit — Use offensive weapon — Joint criminal enterprise SENTENCING — Young adult offender — offences as juvenile — background of disadvantage Legislation Cited: Crimes Act Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act Cases Cited: BP v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 159 Bugmy (2013) 249 CLR 571 Bullock v The Queen [2016] NSWCCA 131 R v Fernando (1992) 76 A Crim R 58 Hayek v R [2016] NSWCCA 126 Mack v R [2010] NSWCCA 269 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v Ponfield (1999) 48 NSWLR 32 TL v R [2017] NSWCCA Category: Sentence Parties: Tighreak Trevor Hamilton Director of Public Prosecutions Representation: Counsel:

Solicitors: S Dogulin (Hamilton) K Miller (DPP) File Number(s): 2017/000063882016/00006393

SENTENCE 1. HIS HONOUR: At the outset I think it is appropriate to note that this is a particularly sad case about a very young indigenous man who has had a very difficult short life and has had in recent years very frequent contact with the criminal justice system. It is the type of case which highlights the connection between social deprivation and crime and the need for early intensive supervision of juvenile offenders if they are not to live a life of crime and incarceration. 2. The offender has pleaded guilty in the Local Court and has adhered to those pleas before me to the following offences. The first is that between 7 and 8 January 2017 at Tregear he broke and entered the dwelling house of Graham Wright in Tregear and committed larceny in circumstances of aggravation being that he knew that there was a person present within the dwelling house. That is an offence under s 112(2) of the Crimes Act and has a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment with a standard non-parole period of five years. 3. There is a second offence, the police pursuit, the particulars of which are as follows, that on 8 January 2017 at La Perouse he drove a Ford Falcon motor vehicle knowing that police officers were in pursuit and that he was required to stop the vehicle and did not stop the vehicle and then drove the vehicle recklessly and in a manner dangerous to others. That is an offence under s 51B(1) of the Crimes Act and has a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment. There is no applicable standard non-parole period. 4. There is a third offence that on 8 January 2017 at La Perouse he used an offensive instrument, a motor vehicle, with intent to prevent lawful apprehension of himself. That is an offence under s 33B(1)(a) of the Crimes Act and has a maximum penalty of 12 years imprisonment and there is no applicable standard non-parole period. When sentencing him for the offence of using an offensive weapon to prevent lawful apprehension the offender asks that I take into account two other offences which are on a Form 1 being offences of never licenced person drive a motor vehicle and knowingly drive a stolen conveyance. The first offence is a fine only offence, I do not consider that the offences on the Form 1 are of such seriousness to have any significant impact on the sentence that I am to impose on the prevent lawful apprehension offence.