The Court: Dandenong Magistrates Court
The Lawyer: Samantha Barwick
The Charges:
The Allegations:
The client was released from prison after serving time for aggravated burglary. Upon his release, he was referred to crisis accommodation. However, due to minimal post-release support, no stable housing, and unmanaged substance use issues, he rapidly relapsed. He embarked upon a drug-fuelled crime spree spanning some three months.
He committed a series of offences across Melbourne, including Drink and Drug driving, Common Assault, Theft and Burglary. His behaviour was erratic and fuelled mainly by drug use.
At Court:
The client accepted responsibility for the offences and instructed our solicitor that he wanted to plead guilty to all charges except for one relating to an alleged incident at his ex-partner’s home, which he completely denied.
Our solicitor negotiated the charges and entered a consolidated plea of guilty on most charges. The client received a prison term. This sentence was, however, significantly reduced due to the client having entered an early plea and having tendered a psychologist’s report.
The prosecution, however, was unwilling to withdraw the disputed charge. They instead made several offers to reduce the charges to less serious ones if the client pleaded guilty. Our solicitor argued that the client would not accept any of the offers, and we would rather have the matter proceed to a contested hearing.
The Outcome:
As we anticipated, the prosecution had difficulty organising their witnesses for the contest. Shortly before the contest, the prosecution again sought to resolve the matter with a lesser plea. We refused, and the prosecution ultimately withdrew the charge. Although our client was already serving a term of imprisonment, the withdrawal meant that he had one less charge on his record and ensured that his sentence was not lengthened.
