The Court: Dandenong Magistrates Court
The Lawyer: Daniel Walsh
The Charges:
- Trafficking a Drug of Dependence
- Possession of a Drug of Dependence
- Dealing with Property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime
The Allegations:
The client was driving in his car with some friends when police officers intercepted them. On questioning, the client told them without hesitation that there were drugs in the car and where they were.
The police officers arrested the client and began searching his home. Upon arriving, officers found one of the client’s friends from earlier in his car, removing a safe from his property. The police seized the safe. The police officers questioned our client, who made full admissions to trafficking, provided a code to unlock the safe, and took responsibility for the contents inside it.
Police seized a total of 130g of powder, pills and rock substance believed to be MDMA (ecstasy); 29.4g of powder believed to be ketamine; 44.36g of GHB; $3,050 in cash, scales and small plastic bags.
They also seized the client’s phone and found several messages that showed him to be conducting trafficking operations.
Nevertheless, the client was alerted to the significant possibility of a serious gaol term. The quantity of drugs found put the matter at a higher threshold of offending in the Magistrates’ Court. For the trafficking charges alone, there is a maximum imprisonment of 15 years each.
The client was charged with three charges of Trafficking a Drug of Dependence, three charges of Possessing a Drug of Dependence and two charges of Dealing with Property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime.
At Court:
Following a summary case conference with the prosecution, the possession charges were withdrawn, and the proceeds of crime charges were combined into one charge. Unfortunately, due to the client’s detailed and thorough admissions to the police, there was not much that could be done about the trafficking charges.
A plea in mitigation was made in court on behalf of the client. The submissions outlined the client’s youth, immaturity, and inexperience. The client was in his early twenties, with no prior charges or offences, and had not been before a court. The court was not impressed by this and noted that the client’s business was very successful and professionally run.
Further submissions were made that pointed to the client’s drug use and the fact that this commenced following a stressful period in his life involving a dire family health situation. It was explained that when that situation created monetary concerns for the family, and they lost their home, the client began trafficking to assist with medical bills and household expenses. The Magistrate accepted that the trafficking was not to fund some form of lavish lifestyle.
The court accepted that, due to the client’s circumstances (specifically his limited prior offences and psychological report), he could benefit from drug and mental health rehabilitation. Corrections Victoria assessed the client for a Community Correction Order (CCO).
What is a Community Correction Order?
A CCO is a sentence that the court can hand down that focuses on the client’s rehabilitative and therapeutic needs, to ensure they are given the help they need, and to ensure they do not come before the criminal justice system again. This can involve mental health assistance, drug and alcohol counselling and direct supervision from judicial staff to ensure compliance with the order. This order can be served in the community, with the client living at home or in a rehabilitation facility if required.
The court requires Corrections to assess the client before making this order, to ensure that this option would be appropriate for the client, and that they would be likely to respond to it and ultimately benefit from it.
The Outcome:
The client was found suitable for a CCO; however, the court also expressed its wish to impose a sentence of imprisonment.
Our solicitor further submitted to the court that rehabilitation should be the main sentencing principle. These submissions pointed to the client’s youth, honest and open cooperation with the police, admissions, and the level of remorse indicated by the early plea of guilty.
The court ultimately agreed and sentenced the client to a Community Correction Order with treatment and community work conditions, without a period of imprisonment.
This was a great outcome achieved by in-depth knowledge of the requisite sentencing principles each court is bound to consider in its decision-making.
