R v Brown; R v Dungay [2020] NSWDC 921

R v Brown; R v Dungay [2020] NSWDC 921

The offending was serious and crossed the custody threshold because the offenders participated in a joint criminal enterprise involving planning, disguises, a rifle, machetes and a hammer on a pole, and intended intimidation if persons were present, although the offending was below the mid-range because the intended larceny was at the lower end for s 112(3), the planning was unsophisticated, no cash was obtained, there was no interaction with the cleaner and no evidence the firearm was loaded or operable. The Form 1 conspiracy increased the need for personal deterrence and retribution. Brown's relative lack of adult serious offending and drug rehabilitation needs justified a four year...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence Following Committal for Sentence and Guilty Pleas
Outcome
Brown convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months. Dungay convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 2 years. Form 1 matters were taken into account for both offenders and special circumstances were found.
Legal Topics
['specially Aggravated Break, Enter and Steal Armed With a Dangerous Weapon' 'conspiracy to Commit Robbery Armed With a Dangerous Weapon' 'form 1 Matters' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'objective Seriousness' 'indigenous Offenders and Subjective Circumstances' 'special Circumstances' 'parole Breach']

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 Committal for Sentence and Guilty Pleas

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed on each offender for specially aggravated break, enter and steal armed with a dangerous weapon contrary to s 112(3) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'How the Form 1 offence of conspiracy to commit robbery armed with a dangerous weapon should be taken into account on sentence.' 'The objective seriousness of the offending, including planning, use of a dangerous weapon, offending in company and presence of other weapons.' "The relevance of each offender's subjective circumstances, including drug use, rehabilitation prospects, Indigenous background and, for Wayne Dungay, intellectual impairment and parole breach." 'Whether special circumstances justified a longer period of supervision in the community.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offending was serious and crossed the custody threshold because the offenders participated in a joint criminal enterprise involving planning, disguises, a rifle, machetes and a hammer on a pole, and intended intimidation if persons were present, although the offending was below the mid-range because the intended larceny was at the lower end for s 112(3), the planning was unsophisticated, no cash was obtained, there was no interaction with the cleaner and no evidence the firearm was loaded or operable. The Form 1 conspiracy increased the need for personal deterrence and retribution. Brown's relative lack of adult serious offending and drug rehabilitation needs justified a four year...

Court Disposition

Brown convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months. Dungay convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 2 years. Form 1 matters were taken into account for both offenders and special circumstances were found.

Orders

  • ['Brown: Convicted.' 'Brown: Form 1 matter taken into account on sentence.' 'Brown: Special circumstances found to allow a longer period of supervision within the community to assist rehabilitation and overcoming use of illegal drugs.' 'Brown: Sentenced to imprisonment for 4 years comprising a non-parole period of 2...