R v James Mervyn HILLHOUSE [2009] NSWDC 427

R v James Mervyn HILLHOUSE [2009] NSWDC 427

The offender's act of driving the car a short distance near his home to facilitate cleaning the garage and securing the car was foolish and thoughtless but did not amount to a contumelious act of defiance or disregard of the s 12 bonds; that conduct constituted good reasons for excusing the failure to comply. The disproportionate consequence of revocation, where periodic detention or home detention was unavailable, provided an additional reason. The new mid range PCA and driving whilst disqualified offences were at the low end of objective seriousness, and s 9 good behaviour bonds were appropriate after almost three months in custody.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / District Court Appeal From Broken Hill Local Court Sentences and Revocation of S 12 Good Behaviour Bonds
Outcome
Appeals allowed; Local Court sentences set aside. No action taken on the failures to comply with the s 12 bonds. For the mid range PCA and driving whilst disqualified offences, the sentences were replaced with 12 month good behaviour bonds and licence disqualification orders.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'revocation of Suspended Sentence Bonds' 'good Reasons for Failure to Comply With Bond Conditions' 'mid Range Prescribed Concentration of Alcohol' 'driving Whilst Disqualified']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'traffic Offences'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'revocation of Suspended Sentence Bonds' 'good Reasons for Failure to Comply With Bond Conditions' 'mid Range Prescribed Concentration of Alcohol' 'driving Whilst Disqualified']

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 Appeal / District Court Appeal From Broken Hill Local Court Sentences and Revocation of S 12 Good Behaviour Bonds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there were good reasons under s 98(3) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 for excusing the offender's failure to comply with the conditions of good behaviour bonds imposed under s 12." 'Whether the conduct giving rise to the breach was a contumelious act of defiance or disregard of the conditions of the bonds.' 'Whether the consequences of revoking the bonds could be taken into account when considering whether to excuse the failure to comply.' 'What sentences should be imposed for driving with the middle range prescribed concentration of alcohol and driving whilst disqualified.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's act of driving the car a short distance near his home to facilitate cleaning the garage and securing the car was foolish and thoughtless but did not amount to a contumelious act of defiance or disregard of the s 12 bonds; that conduct constituted good reasons for excusing the failure to comply. The disproportionate consequence of revocation, where periodic detention or home detention was unavailable, provided an additional reason. The new mid range PCA and driving whilst disqualified offences were at the low end of objective seriousness, and s 9 good behaviour bonds were appropriate after almost three months in custody.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; Local Court sentences set aside. No action taken on the failures to comply with the s 12 bonds. For the mid range PCA and driving whilst disqualified offences, the sentences were replaced with 12 month good behaviour bonds and licence disqualification orders.

Orders

  • ['Under s 20 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001, the sentences of the learned magistrate revoking the s 12 bonds were set aside.' "Under s 98(3)(b) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, the court was satisfied there were good reasons for excusing the offender's failure to comply with the bond...