AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 3 October 2025

R v Hide

[2025] NSWDC 440

Firearms & weapons
CRIME S ENTENCE PRINTED FIREARMS POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED FIREARMS

Citation: R v Hide [2025] NSWDC 440
Court: District Court of NSW
Date: 3 October 2025
Judge: Ryan DCJ

Background

The offender, a 41-year-old former mechanic, was sentenced following guilty pleas to two firearms offences under the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). Police executed a search warrant at his home in April 2023 and found 3D printers, digital blueprint files for manufacturing firearms, metalwork machinery, privately manufactured firearm parts, commercially made parts, and both live and 3D-printed ammunition. The offender had never held any firearms licence or permit.

Seven unregistered firearms were found on the premises: a shortened self-loading rifle and six homemade pistols, most of which were either pistols or prohibited firearms as defined by the Act. Several were missing components such as trigger mechanisms or cylinders, but the Act provides that an incomplete firearm remains a firearm for statutory purposes. Forty digital blueprint files capable of producing firearm parts, many for a "Washbear" 3D-printed revolver, were also located.

The offender was arrested in April 2023, spent approximately 11 months and 13 days in custody, and was then released on strict bail conditions including daily police reporting. He pleaded guilty to both principal charges in February 2025. A third offence of possessing ammunition without authorisation was taken into account on a Form 1 basis.

  • The appropriate sentence for possessing more than three unregistered firearms, including pistols and prohibited firearms, under s 51D(2) of the Firearms Act 1996 (maximum: 20 years; standard non-parole period: 10 years)
  • The appropriate sentence for possessing digital blueprints for the manufacture of firearms under s 51F of the Firearms Act 1996 (maximum: 14 years)
  • Whether the objective seriousness of the offending warranted a non-parole period below the prescribed standard
  • The applicable guilty plea discount and its calculation
  • Whether the offender's bail conditions were sufficiently onerous to justify a reduction in sentence as quasi-custody
  • How to structure an aggregate sentence accounting for pre-sentence custody

Decision

Ryan DCJ assessed the objective seriousness of the firearms possession offence (sequence 14) as below the mid-range. Several factors under s 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 reduced the offender's moral culpability, which justified imposing a non-parole period below the 10-year standard. The Court accepted that the offender's ADHD diagnosis and his tendency to "hyper-fixate" on topics were relevant to his personal circumstances, though not to a degree that displaced the seriousness of the conduct.

A discount of 25% was applied to both sentences to reflect the guilty pleas. The Court noted that each plea was not entered at the first reasonable opportunity, but the pleas did still conserve court resources and demonstrate some acceptance of responsibility.

On the question of bail conditions, the Court found that while no specific submissions were made on the point, the conditions imposed were onerous and had been complied with over a lengthy period. This justified a modest reduction in the sentences that would otherwise have been imposed.

The Court imposed an aggregate sentence rather than separate cumulative or concurrent terms, in keeping with the sentencing methodology for related offences. The aggregate sentence was backdated to October 2024 to account for the pre-sentence period already served in custody.

Orders Made

  • The offender was convicted of the sequence 14 offence (s 51D(2), Firearms Act 1996) and the sequence 5 offence (s 51F, Firearms Act 1996)
  • Indicative sentence for the sequence 14 offence: 4 years and 9 months, with an indicative non-parole period of 3 years, 6 months and 20 days (taking into account the Form 1 ammunition offence)
  • Indicative sentence for the sequence 5 offence: 4 years and 2 months
  • Aggregate sentence of 5 years and 8 months, backdated to commence 21 October 2024
  • Non-parole period of 4 years and 3 months, also commencing 21 October 2024
  • Earliest eligible release to parole: 20 January 2029

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court confirmed that 3D-printed firearms and digital blueprint files fall squarely within the serious firearms offence provisions of the Firearms Act 1996, attracting substantial maximum penalties of 20 years and 14 years respectively.
  • Under s 4(2) of the Firearms Act 1996, an incomplete firearm (one missing a part such as a trigger mechanism or cylinder) remains a firearm for the purposes of the Act, meaning incompleteness does not reduce the statutory classification or the offence category.
  • A non-parole period below the standard prescribed period is available where objective seriousness is assessed as below the mid-range and where personal mitigating factors under s 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 reduce moral culpability.
  • Onerous bail conditions, even where no detailed submissions are made, may justify a modest reduction in sentence where compliance has been maintained over a lengthy period, on the basis they operate as a partial equivalent of custody.
  • The decision illustrates the sentencing framework applicable to privately manufactured, untraceable firearms, a category the Court noted represents an alternative supply source for persons who cannot or will not access weapons through licensed or black-market channels.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A
- Firearms Act 1996 (NSW), ss 4(1), 4(2), 4C, 51D(1), 51D(2), 51F, 65(3)

Cases
- Arnold v R [2011] NSWCCA 150
- Barbaro v The Queen (2012) 226 A Crim R 354
- Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
- Chandab v R [2021] NSWCCA 186
- Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1
- KG v R [2012] NSWCCA 10
- La v R [2021] NSWCCA 136
- Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295
- RLS v R [2012] NSWCCA 236
- R v Cromarty [2004] NSWCCA 54
- R v Engert (1995) 84A Crim R 67
- R v Mack [2009] NSWCCA 216
- R v Mahmud [2010] NSWCCA 219
- R v MAK; R v MSK [2006] NSWCCA 381
- R v Mezzadri [2011] NSWCCA 125
- R v Quinlin [2021] NSWCCA 284
- R v Tolley [2004] NSWCCA 165
- R v Way [2004] NSWCCA 131
- Stojanovski v R [2013] NSWCCA 334