R v John Michael Camilleri [2014] NSWDC 235

R v John Michael Camilleri [2014] NSWDC 235

The offender's offences required full time custody because Count 1 was serious offending just below the mid-range of objective seriousness and Count 3 was within the lower range, the offender was part of a planned joint criminal enterprise, general and specific deterrence were important, and he was responsible for...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Remarks on Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty on Counts 1 and 3 and Sentence Hearing
Outcome
Full time custodial sentence imposed. The offender was convicted on Counts 1 and 3, found guilty on Sequence 4 and Sequence 6, and found not guilty on Sequence 5. Parole eligibility date fixed at 23 July 2015.
Legal Topics
['taking and Driving a Motor Vehicle With Assault in Company' 'robbery With Corporal Violence' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'objective Seriousness' 'special Circumstances' 'totality and Parity' 'section 166 Certificate Offences']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['taking and Driving a Motor Vehicle With Assault in Company' 'robbery With Corporal Violence' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'objective Seriousness' 'special Circumstances' 'totality and Parity' 'section 166 Certificate Offences']

Source-derived case record

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 Sentencing / Remarks on Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty on Counts 1 and 3 and Sentence Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for taking and driving a motor vehicle with assault in company under s 154C(2) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'What sentence should be imposed for robbery with corporal violence under s 95(1) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'Whether the offender and co-offender were engaged in a joint criminal enterprise and how that affected responsibility and culpability.' 'Whether special circumstances existed under s 44(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.' "Whether the offender's being on bail for later-withdrawn charges should aggravate the offending." 'Whether offences on the s 166 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 certificate were proved and how they should be sentenced.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's offences required full time custody because Count 1 was serious offending just below the mid-range of objective seriousness and Count 3 was within the lower range, the offender was part of a planned joint criminal enterprise, general and specific deterrence were important, and he was responsible for the acts in the enterprise while his moral culpability was less than the co-offender's having regard to his conduct and subjective circumstances. Special circumstances were found due to his first full time custodial sentence and need for drug rehabilitation, but no discount for remorse was allowed because he had not accepted full responsibility.

Court Disposition

Full time custodial sentence imposed. The offender was convicted on Counts 1 and 3, found guilty on Sequence 4 and Sequence 6, and found not guilty on Sequence 5. Parole eligibility date fixed at 23 July 2015.

Orders

  • ['Count 1: convicted of taking and driving a motor vehicle with assault in company pursuant to s 154C(2) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'Count 1: sentenced to a non-parole period of 18 months commencing on 24 November 2013 and terminating on 23 May 2015.' 'Count 1: sentenced to a further term of imprisonment of 12 months...