R v Carter [2018] NSWDC 484

R v Carter [2018] NSWDC 484

The offending was at least in the midrange of objective gravity because it involved premeditated entry into a home, damage to gain entry, theft of jewellery of significant value, and breach of the victim's privacy and home security. The offender was a confirmed recidivist with a horrendous criminal history, was on conditional liberty, had very limited rehabilitation prospects and a high risk of reoffending, so imprisonment was the only appropriate sentence. After allowing a 25% discount for the early plea, special circumstances justified a slightly longer parole period to assist counselling, treatment, reintegration, and adoption of a law-abiding lifestyle.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for Break and Enter House and Steal / Sentence After Committal for Sentence and Guilty Plea
Outcome
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment.
Legal Topics
['break and Enter House and Steal' 'theft of Jewellery' 'objective Seriousness' 'drug Addiction' 'recidivism' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['break and Enter House and Steal' 'theft of Jewellery' 'objective Seriousness' 'drug Addiction' 'recidivism' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']

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 Sentence for Break and Enter House and Steal / Sentence After Committal for Sentence and Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for an offence contrary to s 112(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 involving breaking into a house and stealing jewellery valued at $7,725.' 'Whether the offender should receive a 25% discount for the utility of an early guilty plea.' 'Whether special circumstances justified a longer period on parole.' "How the offender's criminal history, drug addiction, conditional liberty, remorse, rehabilitation prospects, and risk of reoffending should affect sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The offending was at least in the midrange of objective gravity because it involved premeditated entry into a home, damage to gain entry, theft of jewellery of significant value, and breach of the victim's privacy and home security. The offender was a confirmed recidivist with a horrendous criminal history, was on conditional liberty, had very limited rehabilitation prospects and a high risk of reoffending, so imprisonment was the only appropriate sentence. After allowing a 25% discount for the early plea, special circumstances justified a slightly longer parole period to assist counselling, treatment, reintegration, and adoption of a law-abiding lifestyle.

Court Disposition

Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment.

Orders

  • ['The offender is convicted of break and enter a house and steal.' 'The offender is sentenced to a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months commencing on 4 August 2017 and expiring on 3 February 2021.' 'The offender is sentenced to a balance of term of 1 year and 6 months commencing on 4 February 2021 and expiring...