R v Haidas [2021] NSWDC 235

R v Haidas [2021] NSWDC 235

The armed robbery was objectively serious because it was committed in company, involved planning, disguises and weapons, included the offender directing an axe-type weapon at a vulnerable lone shopkeeper, and occurred while the offender was subject to conditional liberty. Although the offence fell slightly below the middle range of objective seriousness and required full-time custody, the offender's early guilty plea, youth, first period in custody, remorse, work history and reasonably favourable prospects of rehabilitation justified a 25% discount and a finding of special circumstances, producing a head sentence of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Early Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months; special circumstances found; breach of Community Corrections Order proved but no action taken.
Legal Topics
['robbery Armed With an Offensive Weapon' 'drive Whilst Disqualified' 'community Corrections Order Breach' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'special Circumstances' 'youth and Rehabilitation']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['robbery Armed With an Offensive Weapon' 'drive Whilst Disqualified' 'community Corrections Order Breach' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'special Circumstances' 'youth and Rehabilitation']

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 After Early Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for robbery armed with an offensive weapon under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'Whether the objective seriousness of the armed robbery required full-time custody.' "Whether the offender's early guilty plea warranted a 25% discount." 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the ordinary ratio between the head sentence and non-parole period.' 'What action should be taken in relation to the breach of the Community Corrections Order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The armed robbery was objectively serious because it was committed in company, involved planning, disguises and weapons, included the offender directing an axe-type weapon at a vulnerable lone shopkeeper, and occurred while the offender was subject to conditional liberty. Although the offence fell slightly below the middle range of objective seriousness and required full-time custody, the offender's early guilty plea, youth, first period in custody, remorse, work history and reasonably favourable prospects of rehabilitation justified a 25% discount and a finding of special circumstances, producing a head sentence of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.

Court Disposition

Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months; special circumstances found; breach of Community Corrections Order proved but no action taken.

Orders

  • ['For robbery armed with an offensive weapon, the offender is sentenced to a head sentence of 3 years 4 months imprisonment, commencing on 23 June 2020 and expiring on 22 October 2023.' 'A non-parole period of 1 year 8 months is imposed, commencing on 23 June 2020 and expiring on 22 February 2022.' 'Special...