STATE OF TASMANIA v COREY ANTHONY BRODERICK 7 DECEMBER 2022
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE JAGO J
Corey Broderick, you have pleaded to guilty to one count of assault contrary to s184 of the Criminal Code. The complainant was your then partner. You had been in a significant relationship with her for approximately four to five months. Whilst you maintained separate units, the complainant would stay with you most nights.
On 24 May 2021, you and the complainant became involved in an argument over some missing tobacco. You accused her of taking it and called her some abusive names. She retaliated by calling you a name. You advanced quickly towards her and struck her in the side of the face with an open hand. She immediately fell to the ground and as a result of the impact, felt pain to her ear and to the side of her face. The complainant subsequently attended the North West Regional Hospital. She was found to have a ruptured ear drum and mild swelling over the right side of her head and tenderness over her right jaw bone. A CT scan revealed that she had skull fractures. She was required to undergo remedial surgery, which included overlay with titanium mesh. Clearly then, the injury you caused was most significant. I am told that with time, her injuries resolved. No Victim Impact Statement was provided, but it is readily appreciated that her recovery would have been difficult and painful, and the incident itself frightening. The complainant wishes to pursue her relationship with you and remain supportive of you. I take that into account, although it is far from the most pertinent of sentencing considerations.
The defendant is now 35 years of age. He resides with his mother and step-father. His step-father is unwell and is currently battling a cancer diagnosis. The defendant provides support for his mother and step-father. The defendant had a stable upbringing. He has always been well supported by his mother and continues to have a positive relationship with her. The defendant completed Grade 10 and went on to commence a plumbing apprenticeship. In 2013, he sustained a serious injury playing football. His pain management included a prescription for morphine. The defendant developed a dependence upon this, and in time, began to source the substance illegally. In 2016 he was placed on the suboxone programme to help curb reliance on the drug. The defendant was not successful in the programme. By 2018, he had replaced his morphine addiction with an addiction to methyl amphetamine. His use of methyl amphetamine has been problematic since. I am told that on the occasion of the assault, the defendant was affected by methyl amphetamine. This, of course, in no way mitigates his behaviour.
The defendant has a long history of criminal offending. He has many prior convictions for offences of dishonesty, driving offences, bail offences and offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act. In terms of violence, however, his prior history is minimal. There is a matter of common assault that was dealt with when he was a youth. The defendant has received periods of imprisonment by way of sentencing orders for matters of dishonesty in the past.
On 24 February 2022, the defendant was sentenced to a period of imprisonment for dishonesty offences. He was released from custody in April 2022. During the sentencing hearing, I was told that since that date, the defendant had not re-offended and has ceased his use of methyl amphetamine. He has also been engaging with Community Corrections. I note the defendant has recently been remanded in custody in respect to new allegations in the summary jurisdiction. He has pleaded not guilty to those allegations and is entitled to the presumption of innocence. I do not take those allegations into account in this sentencing exercise.
I had the defendant assessed as to his suitability for home detention. The defendant has been assessed as unsuitable because of issues pertaining to the proposed home detention address. The report indicates the defendant has been compliant, however, with the Community Correction order made in 2022. It also indicates the defendant has been free from illicit substance use for approximately eight months now. The defendant is assessed as suitable for a Community Correction order, both supervision and community service hours. He is also deemed suitable for the Family Violence Intervention Programme.
Family violence crimes are always serious. They inherently involve a breach of trust and are typically committed against vulnerable complainants. Such violence is inexcusable and courts have emphasised time and time again the need to condemn family violence. It is all too common and a matter of concern to the broader community. In sentencing such matters, general deterrence, denunciation, punishment and protection of victims – irrespective of their attitude – are paramount sentencing considerations.
This is a serious crime. The defendant’s reaction was completely unprovoked and committed against a person with whom he shared an intimate relationship. It occurred in a home which the complainant frequently shared with the defendant, and where she was entitled to feel safe. It involved dangerous violence. A blow to the head has the potential to cause grave injury. This blow must have been forceful give it, in fact, caused considerable injury, which necessitated surgery. I take into account, however, that it was a single blow and there is no suggestion of protracted violence. There is no doubt the seriousness of the defendant’s conduct warrants the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment. The only real question is whether some or all of that sentence should be suspended. Violence is not something for which the defendant has shown a propensity in the past. He has no prior history of acting in this way previously. The defendant’s use of methyl amphetamine probably provides some explanation for his behaviour although, as I have already noted, is not a mitigating factor. What is relevant, however, is the fact the defendant appears to have addressed his methyl amphetamine use that is relevant to his ongoing rehabilitation, and is also relevant to the weight specific deterrence attracts in the sentencing exercise.
After balancing all relevant considerations, including the defendant’s plea of guilty which counts in his favour, and recognising the seriousness of the defendant’s offending, I am persuaded I should place emphasis upon his rehabilitation. The defendant has, since his release from custody in April of this year, taken meaningful steps to deal with difficulties in his life which may well, in my view, have contributed to his behaviour. Sending the defendant back to prison to serve a sentence at this time may potentially adversely impact on the positive steps he has recently undertaken.
I have decided it is appropriate to impose a wholly suspended period of imprisonment, coupled with a Community Correction Order. Because, in my view, there is a need for some immediate punishment, the defendant will be required to perform some community service hours. Such a sentence should in no way be seen as minimising the seriousness of the defendant’s conduct, or the impact that his actions have had upon the complainant.
I make the following orders: The defendant is convicted of the crime of assault. He is sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 14 months. The whole of that sentence will be suspended for a period of two years from now, on the following conditions:
- He is not to commit another offence punishable by imprisonment during that period;
- That he will be subject to the supervision of a probation officer. He must comply with this condition for a period of 12 months. That period will commence from the date of his release from custody. The core conditions of that order will be set out in a written document provided to
- The defendant must submit to the supervision of a probation officer for the12 month period and he must participate in programmes and/or engage in counselling, and/or attend at and participate in psychological or psychiatric treatment as directed by his probation officer.
- During the period of the Community Correction order, the defendant must undergo assessment and treatment for drug dependency as directed by his probation officer.
- He must undergo assessment and treatment for alcohol dependency as directed by his probation officer.
- The defendant must also attend, participate in and complete the Family Violence Offender Intervention Programme as directed by his probation officer.
- The defendant is required to report to Community Corrections, Reece House, Burnie within 24 hours of his release from custody.
There will be an additional special condition, namely that the defendant complete 100 hours of Community Service.
Mr Broderick, you must appreciate that this sentence is a real sentence of imprisonment. If you are foolish enough to re-offend, and breach the terms of the suspended sentence, it is almost inevitable, in my view, that you will be required to serve the period of imprisonment I have today imposed.
Pursuant to s 13A of the Family Violence Act, I direct the offence be recorded on the defendant’s criminal record as a family violence offence.
I made a Family Violence Order pursuant to s 36 of the Family Violence Act. That order will be in the same terms as the Family Violence Order dated 1 August 2022, save that I order an amendment of the residential address to reflect the new address of [address withheld]. That Family Violence Order will operate for a period of 18 months from today’s date. In making that order, I acknowledge the complainant’s position that she did not seek an extension of the order, but in my view, the order is necessary and moreover it will support the defendant in complying with the conditions of the suspended sentence. If in time variation to the terms of the Family Violence Order is warranted, then an appropriate application can be put before a court.
I make a compensation order in favour of the complainant in an amount to be assessed.