R v AX [2015] NSWDC 75

R v AX [2015] NSWDC 75

The offences were serious because the offender sexually assaulted his young daughter in her home and abused a position of trust, and general deterrence and denunciation were required. However, having regard to historical sentencing practice, the utilitarian and contritional value of the guilty pleas, the cessation of offending, the offender's strong rehabilitation over about 20 years, low likelihood of reoffending, absence of a significant criminal record, the unusual delay circumstances, and totality, the appropriate terms of imprisonment were 18 months and 21 months and could be suspended pursuant to s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty on Arraignment to Two Counts
Outcome
Offender convicted on both counts and sentenced to suspended terms of imprisonment.
Legal Topics
['indecent Assault of Child Under 10' 'delay in Prosecution' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'suspended Sentence' 'comparative Sentences' 'breach of Trust']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['indecent Assault of Child Under 10' 'delay in Prosecution' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'suspended Sentence' 'comparative Sentences' 'breach of Trust']

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 / Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty on Arraignment to Two Counts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What sentences should be imposed for two historical offences of assault with an act of indecency upon the offender's daughter when she was under ten years old." 'Whether the offender should receive a discount for the utilitarian value of his guilty pleas.' 'How delay in prosecution, rehabilitation, low risk of reoffending and historical sentencing practice should affect sentence.' 'Whether the terms of imprisonment should be suspended pursuant to s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offences were serious because the offender sexually assaulted his young daughter in her home and abused a position of trust, and general deterrence and denunciation were required. However, having regard to historical sentencing practice, the utilitarian and contritional value of the guilty pleas, the cessation of offending, the offender's strong rehabilitation over about 20 years, low likelihood of reoffending, absence of a significant criminal record, the unusual delay circumstances, and totality, the appropriate terms of imprisonment were 18 months and 21 months and could be suspended pursuant to s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.

Court Disposition

Offender convicted on both counts and sentenced to suspended terms of imprisonment.

Orders

  • ['Count 1: convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months, suspended pursuant to s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.' 'Count 2: convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 21 months, suspended pursuant to s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.' 'The offender is to enter good behaviour bonds...