The Court: Dandenong Magistrates Court
The Lawyer: Daniel Walsh
The Charges:
- Burglary
- Theft
- Drive Whilst Disqualified
- Possess a Drug of Dependence
- Commit an Indictable Offence Whilst on Bail
The Allegations:
Our client allegedly committed two burglaries at the same house within three days.
The total value of property taken due to these burglaries, including the property owner’s motor vehicle, was alleged to be $35,600.
In the second alleged burglary, CCTV footage shows our client driving a stolen van into a car park at the rear of the property and, together with the co-accused, placing items into the back of the van. The van had allegedly been stolen on an earlier occasion. There was no CCTV footage showing our client or the co-accused at the property at the time of the first alleged burglary.
When interviewed, the co-accused admitted to both burglaries and stated that our client was present on both occasions. In the recorded interview, our client admitted to the second property visit but denied involvement in the first incident.
Our client was on bail during these offences and held a disqualified driver’s licence.
On the same day of the second burglary, our client was arrested in the stolen van a few hours later. The client was charged with offences relating only to a stolen vehicle and driving while disqualified. He was placed on a 12-month Community Correction Order.
Ten days after receiving the Community Correction Order, our client was again arrested at their residential premises and faced additional charges.
At the time of the arrest, two passports and two ecstasy tablets were found in our client’s possession. The passports belonged to a victim of another burglary. The value of the property taken from that house was $5,419.
Our client stated that he resided in a shared house, and the passports were found on his front lawn the morning of the arrest. Aside from the passports, there was no evidence linking our client to the third burglary.
These additional charges constituted a breach of the Community Correction Order he was currently on. Our client was taken into custody on the day of the arrest. The client had spent 40 days in custody and had left their previous legal practitioners, as they had not made any progress with the matter or even listed a bail application during that period.
The client contacted our office one day before court to discuss the new charges.
The client had hoped to be released from custody on that day. Unfortunately, as his previous legal practitioner had not filed any paperwork before the mention date, a bail application could not be made. Our client would get out only if the matter were resolved and the sentence did not exceed the 40 days already served as pre-sentence detention. Given the significant value of the property taken and our client’s prior history, it was an unlikely outcome unless charges were withdrawn.
At Court:
The matter was extensively case conferenced. The lack of evidence around the third alleged burglary was put to the prosecution, as was the fact that our client had already pleaded guilty and been sentenced in relation to the stolen van. Furthermore, there were lengthy discussions regarding the evidence of the value of the items taken and the lack of CCTV footage for the first incident.
The client was charged with 13 offences. Following lengthy case conferencing, our solicitor submitted an offer to the prosecution that the client would plead guilty to eight charges if the remaining charges were withdrawn. The prosecution accepted this offer, and the matter could proceed with a guilty plea on the same day.
We needed corrections to list the breach and prepare the breach report on the same day so that the breach offence and criminal charges could be finalised.
When the matter was called to court, our solicitor argued that the bulk of the offending had occurred before the imposition of the Corrections Order, with only the possession of a drug of dependence and theft of passports breaching that order.
It was put to the Magistrate that this offending should have been dealt with when he was sentenced to the Community Correction Order and that these offences, whilst serious, would not have affected the sentence by more than the 40 days of imprisonment the client had already served.
Our solicitor submitted that our client was arrested ten days after the imposition of the Community Correction Order, so he was never given a chance to comply with it.
The Outcome:
The Magistrate agreed with the submissions made and ordered a term of imprisonment of 40 days, declaring that 40 days of pre-sentence detention had already been served, and varied the Community Correction Order to commence from that date.
This meant the client would be released from prison that same day and would not need to serve more time in gaol.
This was a great outcome, considering the serious nature of these offences and the value of the property taken. It was achieved through meticulous attention to detail and thoroughly prepared legal submissions.
