R v Golonski [2015] NSWDC 402

R v Golonski [2015] NSWDC 402

The three principal offences were at the lower end of the range of objective seriousness for their type, but the offender's extensive prior record for similar offending moved them higher within that band. His earliest available guilty pleas, remorse, protective custody and risk of institutionalisation warranted moderation, but his poor parole history and request for a fixed term could not avoid the legal requirement to set a non-parole period for the aggravated offence. Applying totality to offences committed during one criminal episode, an aggregate sentence of six years imprisonment with a four-year non-parole period was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentencing After Pleas of Guilty
Outcome
Aggregate sentence of six years imprisonment imposed with a non-parole period of four years; some related and backup offences sentenced concurrently or by conviction, and other offences remitted to the Local Court.
Legal Topics
['break, Enter and Steal' 'aggravated Break, Enter and Steal' 'property Offences' 'related Offences and Backup Offences' 'non Parole Period' 'early Plea of Guilty' 'drug Addiction' 'prior Criminal History']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['break, Enter and Steal' 'aggravated Break, Enter and Steal' 'property Offences' 'related Offences and Backup Offences' 'non Parole Period' 'early Plea of Guilty' 'drug Addiction' 'prior Criminal History']

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 / Sentencing After Pleas of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What aggregate sentence should be imposed for two offences of break, enter and steal and one offence of aggravated break, enter and steal.' "How the offender's early guilty pleas, remorse, drug addiction, protective custody, risk of institutionalisation, prior criminal history and poor prospects of rehabilitation should affect sentence." "Whether a non-parole period could be declined despite the offender's request for a fixed term." 'Which additional offences were related offences or backup offences capable of being dealt with under s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), and which should be remitted to the Local Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The three principal offences were at the lower end of the range of objective seriousness for their type, but the offender's extensive prior record for similar offending moved them higher within that band. His earliest available guilty pleas, remorse, protective custody and risk of institutionalisation warranted moderation, but his poor parole history and request for a fixed term could not avoid the legal requirement to set a non-parole period for the aggravated offence. Applying totality to offences committed during one criminal episode, an aggregate sentence of six years imprisonment with a four-year non-parole period was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Aggregate sentence of six years imprisonment imposed with a non-parole period of four years; some related and backup offences sentenced concurrently or by conviction, and other offences remitted to the Local Court.

Orders

  • ['For the three principal offences, an aggregate sentence of six years imprisonment commencing 20 September 2014 and expiring 19 September 2020 was imposed.' 'A non-parole period of four years imprisonment commencing 20 September 2014 and expiring 19 September 2018 was fixed.' 'Charges 1 to 4 in the schedule of...