R v Adrian MURRAY [2009] NSWDC 407

R v Adrian MURRAY [2009] NSWDC 407

Although the offence was within the lower range of objective seriousness because it was unsophisticated, involved no significant advance planning and no property was stolen, imprisonment was the only appropriate penalty because the offence carried a 14 year maximum, was committed in company, the offender had prior convictions for similar property offences, and he committed it while serving a suspended sentence. The otherwise appropriate sentence was reduced to 21 months to reflect mental health considerations, improved rehabilitation prospects and a guilty plea, and was wholly suspended under s 12 on conditions because of the offender's rehabilitation prospects and supportive family...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Aggravated Breaking and Entering With Intent to Commit a Serious Indictable Offence / Sentence After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to 21 months imprisonment, wholly suspended pursuant to s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, on condition that he enter into a good behaviour bond for 21 months.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Break, Enter and Steal in Company' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'prior Criminal Record' 'offence Committed While Serving Suspended Sentence' 'specific Deterrence' 'mental Health and Rehabilitation' 'suspended Sentence' 'good Behaviour Bond']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing for Aggravated Breaking and Entering With Intent to Commit a Serious Indictable Offence / Sentence After Plea of Guilty

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for aggravated breaking and entering with intent to steal under s 113(2) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'How to assess objective seriousness where the offence was unsophisticated, involved limited planning and no actual theft, but was committed in company.' "What weight should be given to the offender's prior property offending and the fact that the offence was committed while serving a suspended sentence." "What weight should be given to the offender's mental health, restrictive bail conditions, pre-sentence custody, family support, rehabilitation prospects and plea of guilty."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offence was within the lower range of objective seriousness because it was unsophisticated, involved no significant advance planning and no property was stolen, imprisonment was the only appropriate penalty because the offence carried a 14 year maximum, was committed in company, the offender had prior convictions for similar property offences, and he committed it while serving a suspended sentence. The otherwise appropriate sentence was reduced to 21 months to reflect mental health considerations, improved rehabilitation prospects and a guilty plea, and was wholly suspended under s 12 on conditions because of the offender's rehabilitation prospects and supportive family...

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to 21 months imprisonment, wholly suspended pursuant to s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, on condition that he enter into a good behaviour bond for 21 months.

Orders

  • ['Adrian Murray is convicted of aggravated breaking and entering with intent to commit a serious indictable offence.' 'Adrian Murray is sentenced to 21 months imprisonment.' 'Under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, execution of the whole sentence is suspended for the whole period of 21 months.' 'Adrian...