R v Rosenberg [2017] NSWDC 194

R v Rosenberg [2017] NSWDC 194

Because the offender pleaded guilty early to robbery in company but was not criminally responsible for the co-offender's violence, wounding, or weapon use, and taking into account his custody, personal circumstances, remorse, limited rehabilitation prospects, protection status, and special circumstances, the appropriate sentence was imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months and a head sentence of 3 years, backdated to 2 September 2016. For the admitted breach of the s 9 bond, conviction with no other penalty under s 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentencing After Early Guilty Plea to Robbery in Company and Admitted Breach of S 9 Bond
Outcome
Offender convicted for breach of s 9 bond with no other penalty; sentenced for robbery in company to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months and a head sentence of 3 years, and ordered to be released from custody on 1 March 2018.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'robbery in Company' 'bag Snatching' 'breach of S 9 Bond' 'intensive Correction Order' 'conditional Liberty' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'robbery in Company' 'bag Snatching' 'breach of S 9 Bond' 'intensive Correction Order' 'conditional Liberty' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'non Parole Period']

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 Early Guilty Plea to Robbery in Company and Admitted Breach of S 9 Bond

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What sentence should be imposed for robbery in company where the offender participated in the bag snatching but was not criminally responsible for the co-offender's violence or wounding of the victim." "How the offender's early guilty plea, time in custody, prior criminal history, offending while subject to a s 9 bond and an ICO, personal background, remorse, prospects of rehabilitation, and likely custody on protection should affect sentence." 'What order should be made for the admitted breach of the s 9 bond.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the offender pleaded guilty early to robbery in company but was not criminally responsible for the co-offender's violence, wounding, or weapon use, and taking into account his custody, personal circumstances, remorse, limited rehabilitation prospects, protection status, and special circumstances, the appropriate sentence was imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months and a head sentence of 3 years, backdated to 2 September 2016. For the admitted breach of the s 9 bond, conviction with no other penalty under s 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Offender convicted for breach of s 9 bond with no other penalty; sentenced for robbery in company to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months and a head sentence of 3 years, and ordered to be released from custody on 1 March 2018.

Orders

  • ['For the breach of bond matter the offender is convicted with no other penalty under s 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.' 'For the offence of robbery in company, the offender is sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months to date from 2 September 2016 and a head sentence of three...