R v Minkley [2019] NSWDC 422

R v Minkley [2019] NSWDC 422

The offences were armed robberies with a machete closely aligned with the R v Henry guideline category; the Hairdresser Offence was in the low to mid-range and the Pharmacy Offence was in the mid-range of objective seriousness. In light of the planning, vulnerable shopkeeper victims, criminal history, bond breaches and medium to high risk of reoffending, but also the early guilty pleas, remorse and drug-related background, no sentence other than full-time imprisonment was appropriate. An aggregate sentence of 4 years and 8 months with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months was imposed, and the offender satisfied the requirements for referral to the Drug Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Guilty Pleas
Outcome
The offender was convicted on each count and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment with referral to the Drug Court.
Legal Topics
['armed Robbery With an Offensive Weapon' 'aggregate Sentence' 'form 1 Offences' 'breach of Good Behaviour Bonds' 'drug Addiction and Rehabilitation' 'drug Court Referral']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['armed Robbery With an Offensive Weapon' 'aggregate Sentence' 'form 1 Offences' 'breach of Good Behaviour Bonds' 'drug Addiction and Rehabilitation' 'drug Court Referral']

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 / Sentence After Guilty Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Assessment of the objective seriousness of two armed robbery offences committed with a machete.' 'Whether full-time imprisonment was the only appropriate sentencing option.' "The effect of the offender's early guilty pleas, remorse, criminal history, bond breaches, drug addiction and risk of reoffending on sentence." 'Whether the offender should be sentenced by way of an aggregate sentence and referred to the Drug Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offences were armed robberies with a machete closely aligned with the R v Henry guideline category; the Hairdresser Offence was in the low to mid-range and the Pharmacy Offence was in the mid-range of objective seriousness. In light of the planning, vulnerable shopkeeper victims, criminal history, bond breaches and medium to high risk of reoffending, but also the early guilty pleas, remorse and drug-related background, no sentence other than full-time imprisonment was appropriate. An aggregate sentence of 4 years and 8 months with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months was imposed, and the offender satisfied the requirements for referral to the Drug Court.

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted on each count and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment with referral to the Drug Court.

Orders

  • ['The offender is convicted of each count set forth in the indictment.' 'The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 4 years and 8 months with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months.' 'Pursuant to the provisions of section 47 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), the Court directs that...