Citation: R v Jones [2025] NSWDC 202
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 4 April 2025
Judge: Bourke SC DCJ
Background
The offender, Dylan Jones, appeared for sentencing on three offences arising from two separate incidents in Cessnock in January 2024. At the time of both incidents, he was on parole for earlier offences that included a prior police pursuit.
The first incident, on 11 January 2024, involved the offender breaking into a neighbour's unit in an apartment complex, motivated by a belief that the victim had been charged with an offence involving a child. He forced his way through a rear window, punched the victim to the nose and repeatedly struck him to the head and neck, and compelled the victim to exit through a window under threat of further violence.
The second incident occurred on 24 January 2024, when police attempted to stop the offender for a random breath test. He fled in a vehicle at speeds exceeding the posted limits, ran a red light, repeatedly crossed onto the wrong side of the road forcing oncoming vehicles to swerve, and continued driving after road spikes deflated his tyres, eventually coming to a stop when the vehicle was on its rims. He was also disqualified from driving at the time.
Legal Issues
- What sentence was appropriate for the aggravated break and enter with intent to commit assault occasioning actual bodily harm, having regard to the standard non-parole period and the offender's personal circumstances?
- How should the police pursuit offence and the driving while disqualified offence be sentenced, including the three additional matters on the Form 1?
- What discount applied for early guilty pleas?
- How should the commencement date of the aggregate sentence be fixed, given the offender had been in custody partly serving the balance of a pre-existing sentence whose parole had been revoked?
- Was it appropriate to impose an aggregate sentence, and if so, what were the indicative terms for each individual offence?
Decision
His Honour applied a 25 per cent discount to all offences, reflecting the utilitarian value of the offender's early guilty pleas at the earliest opportunity. The maximum penalties and, where applicable, the standard non-parole periods were treated as important guideposts in calibrating the sentence.
On the question of when the sentence should commence, the court acknowledged that the offender had been in custody since 24 January 2024, but noted that his parole on the earlier sentence had been revoked from 11 January 2024 as a consequence of the present offending. That earlier sentence does not expire until 23 August 2025. The court declined to backdate the sentence to the date of arrest, as that would effectively give the offender double credit for time already being served on the revoked parole. Instead, the sentence was backdated by approximately half the period between the date of arrest and the sentencing date, commencing 29 August 2024.
The court imposed an aggregate sentence rather than separate terms. Indicative terms were set out as required: two years nine months with a non-parole period of one year seven months for the aggravated break and enter; 18 months for the police pursuit (taking the Form 1 matters into account); and six months for driving while disqualified under a section 166 certificate. All indicative terms reflected the 25 per cent plea discount.
The aggregate head sentence was set at three years three months, with a non-parole period of one year eleven months. A three-year licence disqualification was also imposed. The court directed that a psychological report be forwarded to Justice Health and Community Corrections.
Orders Made
- Aggregate head sentence of three years three months, commencing 29 August 2024, expiring 28 November 2027
- Non-parole period of one year eleven months, expiring 28 July 2026
- Indicative sentence for aggravated break and enter: two years nine months, non-parole period one year seven months
- Indicative sentence for police pursuit (including Form 1 matters): 18 months
- Indicative sentence for driving while disqualified (s 166 certificate): six months
- Three-year licence disqualification
- Psychological report of Ms Hare to be forwarded to Justice Health and Community Corrections
Key Takeaways
- Where an offender is in custody partly because parole was revoked on an earlier sentence triggered by the present offending, the District Court held it was not appropriate to backdate the new sentence to the full date of arrest; instead, a partial backdating reflecting approximately half the intervening period was adopted.
- A 25 per cent sentencing discount applies where a guilty plea is entered at the earliest opportunity, reflecting the utilitarian value of that plea under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
- When imposing an aggregate sentence, the sentencing court is required to set out the indicative terms that would otherwise have been imposed for each individual offence, even though the aggregate term governs the sentence actually served.
- The standard non-parole period for aggravated break and enter under s 112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (five years) functions as a guidepost in the sentencing exercise, not a mandatory floor, and the court may impose a non-parole period below it where circumstances warrant.
- Three additional offences carrying fines only were dealt with on a Form 1 document and taken into account in sentencing for the police pursuit offence, a procedural mechanism that allows minor related matters to be addressed without separate penalties.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 51B(1), 112(2)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 166
- Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), s 54(1)(a)
Cases
- BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 159
- Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571
- Commonwealth DPP v De La Rosa (2010) 273 ALR 324
- TM v R [2023] NSWCCA 185