R v Flood [2020] NSWDC 626

R v Flood [2020] NSWDC 626

Although the offence was a serious historical child sexual assault involving abuse of the offender's position as the complainant's uncle and caused lasting harm, the Court was not satisfied after synthesising objective and subjective factors that imprisonment was the appropriate course under s 5 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The absence of planning, single opportunistic incident, effective absence of prior criminal record, good character, guilty plea, remorse, very low risk of reoffending, long period without further misconduct, advanced age, serious health issues and increased infection risk during the coronavirus pandemic justified conviction and a 3 year supervised Community...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for One Charge Contrary to S 76 Crimes Act 1900 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty on Arraignment
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to a Community Corrections Order for a period of 3 years.
Legal Topics
['indecent Assault' 'child Sexual Offence' 'historical Offence' 'plea of Guilty' 'community Corrections Order' 'mitigating Factors' 'good Character' 'victim Impact Statement']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['indecent Assault' 'child Sexual Offence' 'historical Offence' 'plea of Guilty' 'community Corrections Order' 'mitigating Factors' 'good Character' 'victim Impact Statement']

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 One Charge Contrary to S 76 Crimes Act 1900 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty on Arraignment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for a historical indecent assault contrary to s 76 Crimes Act 1900 committed against a child complainant between 1975 and 1976.' 'Whether the offence required a custodial sentence under s 5 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 or could be dealt with by a non-custodial order.' 'How to assess objective seriousness, including age of the victim, relationship of trust, isolation, sexual gratification, absence of planning, and harm to the victim.' 'How to take account of mitigating subjective factors including guilty plea, prior good character, remorse, age, health, delay, low risk of reoffending, and hardship in custody.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offence was a serious historical child sexual assault involving abuse of the offender's position as the complainant's uncle and caused lasting harm, the Court was not satisfied after synthesising objective and subjective factors that imprisonment was the appropriate course under s 5 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The absence of planning, single opportunistic incident, effective absence of prior criminal record, good character, guilty plea, remorse, very low risk of reoffending, long period without further misconduct, advanced age, serious health issues and increased infection risk during the coronavirus pandemic justified conviction and a 3 year supervised Community...

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to a Community Corrections Order for a period of 3 years.

Orders

  • ['The offender is convicted of the crime to which he pleaded guilty.' 'A Community Corrections Order is specified for a period of 3 years commencing 07 April 2020.' 'The Community Corrections Order is subject to the standard conditions in s 88 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999: the offender must not commit any...