Citation: Regina v Jason Shiagetz [2003] NSWCCA 115
Court: NSW Court of Criminal Appeal
Date: 2 May 2003
Judge(s): Sully J, Levine J, Buddin J
Background
The appellant was convicted in the District Court in March 2002 of robbery in company under s 112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), following a jury trial before Shillington DCJ. The offence arose from an incident in the early hours of 21 April 2001 in Flinders Street, Surry Hills, where the victim was confronted by a group of men and robbed of his wallet and backpack while walking on the street.
Police officers in a patrolling vehicle observed the appellant nearby shortly after the incident. They saw him place a backpack on the ground, reach into the front of his trousers, remove a wallet, and throw it into a garden ledge. The victim identified the appellant as his attacker, and that identification was corroborated by a companion and the observations of the attending officers.
The appellant was sentenced to four years' imprisonment commencing 1 July 2001, with a non-parole period of two years. He appealed against his conviction and sought leave to appeal against his sentence, appearing in person before the Court of Criminal Appeal.
Legal Issues
- Whether the conviction was sound in light of the evidence, including the identification evidence and the defence's alternative account of events
- Whether the head sentence of four years was manifestly excessive for the offence of robbery in company
Decision
On the conviction appeal, the Court found no error warranting interference. The victim gave direct evidence of the robbery and identified the appellant. His evidence was broadly corroborated by his companion and by the police officers who witnessed the appellant discard a wallet moments after the incident. The jury heard and rejected the defence account, which characterised the incident as a chance altercation rather than a deliberate robbery.
On the sentence appeal, the Court granted leave but dismissed the appeal. Sully J observed that the offence was a "bare-faced robbery of a citizen walking on a public street" and that the existence of a 20-year statutory maximum for robbery in company reflected the serious nature of any such offence. The sentencing judge had taken into account the appellant's prior criminal record, the absence of remorse, and the need for supervision in the community. The Court was not persuaded that the head sentence was manifestly excessive. The appellant's request for a 12-month reduction to achieve immediate release was rejected.
The Court noted a reference in the appellant's correspondence to events in custody said to have placed him at risk, but there was nothing before the Court to explain what that reference was intended to convey, and it could not be acted upon.
Orders Made
- The appeal against conviction is dismissed
- Leave to appeal against sentence is granted
- The appeal against sentence is dismissed
Key Takeaways
- A conviction for robbery in company may rest on the direct evidence of the victim, corroborated by witnesses and by police observations of the accused's conduct immediately after the incident, without requiring any single piece of definitive physical evidence.
- In dismissing the sentence appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeal confirmed that a head sentence of four years for a street robbery in company, committed by an offender with a prior criminal record and no remorse, was within the sound range of sentencing discretion.
- The statutory maximum of 20 years' imprisonment under s 112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) was treated as an indicator of the objective seriousness attached to the category of offence, even where the particular offence attracted a sentence far below that ceiling.
- Unsubstantiated claims made by an unrepresented appellant in correspondence to the Registry, without supporting material, cannot form the basis for appellate relief.
- No error was established in the sentencing judge's approach to the non-parole period, which the appellant himself accepted was within the proper range.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 112(1) and 112(2)
- Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
- Criminal Appeal Act
Cases:
- M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487