Citation: R v Phillips [2024] NSWDC 293
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 22 July 2024
Judge: Colefax SC DCJ
Background
The offender was sentenced for eleven offences arising from three separate episodes of serious criminal conduct in 2022. The offending spanned a brutal group assault causing severe facial injuries to a victim in Liverpool, an aggravated robbery with wounding at a hotel in Unanderra, and a series of firearms, weapons and dangerous driving offences. At the time of the first offence, the offender had been released to parole only two weeks earlier.
The offender had a prior criminal history that included police pursuit, dangerous driving, breaching prohibition orders, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. He had never held a valid driver's licence and had been served with both a firearm prohibition order and a weapons prohibition order in 2020, which he repeatedly breached.
The offender pleaded guilty to all eleven offences. Several additional matters were taken into account on Forms 1, including being carried in a conveyance without the owner's consent, possessing ammunition without a licence, and failing to comply with a direction to stop.
Legal Issues
- What was the appropriate aggregate sentence, having regard to the objective seriousness of each offence, the offender's criminal history, and the principle of totality?
- What discount applied to reflect the utilitarian value of the guilty pleas?
- What weight should be given to the offender's background, including evidence of significant disadvantage, consistent with the principles in Bugmy v The Queen?
- What non-parole period was appropriate in the circumstances?
Decision
His Honour applied a 25 per cent discount to each indicative sentence to reflect the utilitarian value of the guilty pleas. Before the discount, indicative sentences ranged from 10 months (for the eleventh offence) through to 14 years (for the second offence of aggravated robbery with wounding, which was the most serious). After applying the discount, indicative sentences were reduced proportionately across all eleven counts.
The second offence, aggravated robbery with wounding, was treated as the most serious matter, with the first offence (recklessly causing grievous bodily harm whilst in company) and the fourth offence (firing a firearm at a dwelling house with disregard to safety) also attracting substantial indicative sentences. The offender's rapid reoffending while on parole, his persistent disregard for court orders including prohibition orders, and his significant prior record were all weighty factors in the sentencing exercise.
His Honour took totality into account in fixing the aggregate sentence, consistent with the principle discussed in DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa. The court also considered the offender's background of disadvantage under the framework established in Bugmy v The Queen, though this did not substantially reduce the overall sentence given the gravity and volume of the offending.
Orders Made
- Aggregate term of imprisonment of 8 years 6 months
- Non-parole period of 5 years, commencing 26 October 2022 and expiring 25 October 2027
- Balance of term of 3 years 6 months, commencing 26 October 2027 and expiring 25 April 2031
Key Takeaways
- The District Court applied a 25 per cent sentencing discount across all eleven offences to reflect the utilitarian value of the guilty pleas, with indicative pre-discount sentences varying significantly by offence and by the Form 1 matters taken into account.
- Rapid reoffending while on parole, combined with persistent breaches of firearm and weapons prohibition orders, were treated as significant aggravating features of the overall offending conduct.
- Under the Bugmy principle, evidence of an offender's background disadvantage remains relevant to sentencing, but its weight must be assessed in the context of the nature and pattern of the offending.
- The totality principle, as applied following DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa, required the court to ensure that the aggregate sentence reflected the overall criminality without becoming crushing, even where numerous serious offences were involved.
- Where an offender faces a large number of charges spanning multiple episodes, Form 1 matters provide a mechanism for additional offending to be acknowledged in the sentence without generating separate concurrent or cumulative terms.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 35(1), 96, 93GA(1)
- Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), ss 54(1)(a), 117(2)
- Firearms Act 1996 (NSW), ss 7(1), 74(1), 74(3)
- Weapons Prohibition Act 1998 (NSW), s 34(1)
Cases:
- Bugmy v The Queen [2013] 249 CLR 571
- DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194