R v Hewitt [2020] NSWDC 686

R v Hewitt [2020] NSWDC 686

Although the offence was at the low end of objective seriousness, it was aggravated by being committed while the offender was on conditional liberty and by his extensive criminal history. The offender's childhood disadvantage and associated drug addictions engaged Bugmy principles and moderated deterrence and denunciation, but general and specific deterrence, denunciation, community protection and accountability remained significant for break, enter and steal offending. The s 5 custody threshold was crossed. Special circumstances justified a longer parole period to assist reintegration and rehabilitation, while totality warranted only minor concurrency because the offence was unrelated to...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Break, Enter and Steal Contrary to S 112(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (nsw) / Sentence After Guilty Plea
Outcome
The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months with a non-parole period of 10 months.
Legal Topics
['break, Enter and Steal' 'childhood Disadvantage' 'bugmy Principles' 'drug Addiction' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'special Circumstances' 'totality' 'guilty Plea Discount']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['break, Enter and Steal' 'childhood Disadvantage' 'bugmy Principles' 'drug Addiction' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'special Circumstances' 'totality' 'guilty Plea Discount']

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 Break, Enter and Steal Contrary to S 112(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (nsw) / Sentence After Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Assessment of objective seriousness of the break, enter and steal offence' "Whether the offender's childhood disadvantage and associated drug addictions moderated sentencing considerations" 'Whether the custody threshold in s 5 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) was crossed' 'Whether special circumstances justified a longer parole period' 'Extent of concurrency or accumulation with an existing unrelated sentence']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offence was at the low end of objective seriousness, it was aggravated by being committed while the offender was on conditional liberty and by his extensive criminal history. The offender's childhood disadvantage and associated drug addictions engaged Bugmy principles and moderated deterrence and denunciation, but general and specific deterrence, denunciation, community protection and accountability remained significant for break, enter and steal offending. The s 5 custody threshold was crossed. Special circumstances justified a longer parole period to assist reintegration and rehabilitation, while totality warranted only minor concurrency because the offence was unrelated to...

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months with a non-parole period of 10 months.

Orders

  • ['The sentence of imprisonment is 1 year and 6 months, taken to have commenced on 10 July 2020 and expiring on 9 January 2022.' 'The non-parole period is 10 months.' 'The offender may become eligible for release on parole on 9 May 2021.']