Director of Public Prosecutions v Baxter

[2025] ACTSC 22

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	DPP v Baxter
Citation:	[2025] ACTSC 22
Hearing Date:	16 December 2024
Decision Date:	10 February 2025
Before:	Christensen AJ
Decision:	[See 84]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – DRUG AND ALCOHOL SENTENCING LIST – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – property offences –
driving offences – repeat disqualified driving – risk to safety of police and other road users – whether drug and alcohol treatment order appropriate and suitable – prospects of rehabilitation – previous non-compliance with community based orders – addiction from prescribed opioid medication not mitigatory – drug
and alcohol treatment order imposed
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) 393 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) ss 45, 45A, 312, 318, 321, 322A, 324 Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ch 7, ss 7, 12A, 34AA, 46K, 80S, 80T, 80W, 80ZA Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) s 85 Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999 (ACT) s 32
Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999
(ACT) s 7 Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Act 1999 (ACT) s 22
Cases Cited:	DPP v Holder (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 167 R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 Vartzokas v Zanker (1989) 51 SASR 277
Parties:	Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Daniel Jol Baxter (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel
G Meikle (Crown) J McGuire (Offender)
Solicitors
ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Canberra Criminal Lawyers (Offender)
File Numbers:	SCC 239, 240, 283, 284 of 2024
CHRISTENSEN AJ:
1․	Daniel Baxter is to be sentenced for 24 property and driving offences committed in May
and September 2023.
2․	The offences were committed contrary to the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) (Criminal Code),
the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (Crimes Act), the Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1999
(ACT) (Driver Licensing Act), the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act
1999 (ACT) (Safety and Traffic Management Act) and the Road Transport (Vehicle
Registration) Act 1999 (ACT) (Vehicle Registration Act).
3․	Mr Baxter seeks that the inevitable terms of imprisonment to be imposed be served by
way of a drug and alcohol treatment order (treatment order): s 12A Crimes (Sentencing)
Act 2005 (ACT) (Sentencing Act). The prosecution does not oppose the imposition of a
treatment order. Mr Baxter has been assessed as suitable for such an order by ACT
Health Services, but not suitable by ACT Corrective Services. The Court is to carefully
consider whether such an order is an appropriate and suitable one.
4․	The offences the subject of sentence, and the applicable maximum penalties, are as
follows:

2 May 2023 offending

Aggravated burglary	20 years imprisonment and/or 2000 penalty
s 312(a) Criminal Code	units
CAN 2023/5928
Take motor vehicle without consent	5 years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units
(joint commission)
ss 318(1), 45A Criminal Code
CAN 2023/5898
Drive while disqualified	1 year imprisonment and/or 100 penalty units
(repeat offender)	Automatic minimum licence disqualification of
s 32(1)(a) Driver Licensing Act	24 months
CAN 2023/5901
Minor theft	6 months imprisonment and/or 50 penalty
(aid/abet)	units
ss 321, 45 Criminal Code
CAN 2023/5900

7 September 2023 offending

Drive motor vehicle without consent	5 years imprisonment and/ or500 penalty units
s 318(2) Criminal Code
CAN 2023/9246
Dangerous driving	12 months imprisonment and/or 100 penalty
(first offender)	units
s 7(1) Safety and Traffic Management Act	Automatic minimum license disqualification of
CAN 2023/9255	3 months
Drive while disqualified	1 year imprisonment and/or 100 penalty units
(repeat offender)	Automatic minimum licence disqualification of
s 32(1)(a) Driver Licensing Act	24 months
CAN 2023/9277
Numberplate issued for another vehicle	20 penalty units
s 22(1)(a) Vehicle Registration Act
CAN 2023/9259
Making off without payment	2 years imprisonment and/or 200 penalty units
s 322A Criminal Code
CAN 2023/9276

8 September 2023 offending

Drive motor vehicle without consent	5 years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units
s 318(2) Criminal Code
CAN 2023/9248
Aggravated dangerous driving	2 years imprisonment and/or 200 penalty units
(driving at speed)	Automatic minimum licence disqualification of
(repeat offender)	12 months
s 7(1) Safety and Traffic Management Act
CAN 2023/9254
Drive motor vehicle without consent	5 years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units
s 318(2) Criminal Code
CAN 2024/4152
Drive while disqualified	1 year imprisonment and/or 100 penalty units
(repeat offender)	Automatic minimum licence disqualification of
s 32(1)(a) Driver Licensing Act	24 months
CAN 2023/9252
Numberplate issued for another vehicle	20 penalty units
s 22(1)(a) Vehicle Registration Act
CAN 2023/9260
Indecent exposure	1 year imprisonment and/or 20 penalty units
s 393 Crimes Act
CAN 2024/4151
Note: This is an eligible offence per
s 12A(9) Sentencing Act

15 September 2023 offending

Drive motor vehicle without consent	5 years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units
s 318(2) Criminal Code
CAN 2023/9249
Aggravated dangerous driving	2 years imprisonment and/or 200 penalty units
(driving at speed)	Automatic minimum licence disqualification of
(repeat offender)	12 months
s 7(1) Safety and Traffic Management Act
CAN 2023/9256
Drive while disqualified	1 year imprisonment and/or 100 penalty units
(repeat offender)	Automatic minimum license disqualification of
s 32(1)(a) Driver Licensing Act	24 months
CAN 2023/9253
Numberplate issued for another vehicle	20 penalty units
s 22(1)(a) Vehicle Registration Act
CAN 2023/9261

17 September 2023 offending

Drive motor vehicle without consent	5 years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units
s 318(2) Criminal Code
CAN 2023/9250
Aggravated dangerous driving	5 years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units
(fail to stop)	Automatic minimum licence disqualification of
(put at risk the safety of a vulnerable road	12 months
user)
(repeat offender)
s 7(1) Safety and Traffic Management Act
CAN 2023/9257
Drive while disqualified	1 year imprisonment and/or 100 penalty units
(repeat offender)	24 months minimum license disqualification
s 32(1)(a) Driver Licensing Act
CAN 2023/9278
Numberplate issued for another vehicle	20 penalty units
s 22(1)(a) Vehicle Registration Act
CAN 2023/9262

21 September 2023 offending

9․	Mr Baxter was driving, and the co-offender was a passenger. At the time of this driving,
Mr Baxter was a repeat disqualified driver, having been disqualified from driving by the
Magistrates Court on 26 September 2022 for a period of 12 months. Accordingly, the
disqualified driving that occurred here was not immediately after that order and was
towards the end of the disqualification period. This, to a limited extent, moderates the
seriousness of the disqualified driving offending, although it remains that deterrent
sentences are warranted for such conduct.
10․	At 3:40pm the same day, an occupant of the residence returned home and noticed the
front door was unlocked and items were missing. Police were contacted and upon
attendance, police observed there were fresh gouge marks adjacent to the front door
deadbolt.
11․	The entry therefore involved causing damage. It was also done with some persistence
and brazenness, having regard to the location and circumstances of the entry, with a
moderate risk that occupants were present. The entry involved a significant violation of
the privacy of the occupants. The items taken from the residence were of not insignificant
financial value, and included items of sentimental value. Curiously though, Mr Baxter is
not charged, and therefore not to be sentenced, in respect of the theft of the items from
inside of the house. Nonetheless, the aggravated burglary, particularised as one done
with an intention to commit theft of the homestead and the residence, is a serious
example of the offence, with the facts evidencing a persistent and determined intent to
commit theft from two premises.
12․	The offenders and the vehicle were next observed later that afternoon at Woden
Westfield. The co-offender got out of the stolen vehicle and entered the Westfield. She
took a mixer and an air fryer with a total value of $1,198.00 from David Jones. She was
recorded on video by a staff member as she walked back to the carpark and loaded the
stolen items into the stolen vehicle. Mr Baxter stuck his middle finger up in the direction
of the assistant manager. While his role in this offending was one of aiding/abetting, it
has characteristics of again being brazen offending, with little regard for other community
members. The value of the items stolen was not insignificant.
13․	In the early hours of 8 May 2023, police located the Toyota Prado parked outside of a
residence in Pearce. It had stolen registration plates affixed to it. Police entered the
residence and located Mr Baxter. He was arrested on a Sentence Administration Board
(SAB) warrant, and I infer from the available information, released without charge at this
time and continued on an intensive correction order.
14․	A search of the Prado identified a number of items, but none of the items taken during
the aggravated burglary were found or recovered. Subsequent forensic investigations
linked each of the offenders to this vehicle.
15․	It is not clear from the facts whether the vehicle was damaged, but it is apparent that the
owners were without the vehicle for an extended period. They also did not have returned
any of the apparently stolen property, this being property that I have had regard to as
evidencing the intention with the aggravated burglary.
16․	The prosecution sought a reparation order on behalf of the victim with respect to items
of property that were stolen: ch 7 Sentencing Act. Given the limited relevance that the
property stolen has in the sentencing exercise, and that Mr Baxter is not to be regarded
as criminally responsible for taking the property from inside of the house, it is not
appropriate that such an order be made. In any event, I would not have made such an
order having regard to Mr Baxter’s limited financial means. This reasoning applies also
to the reparation order sought by the prosecution on behalf of David Jones as to the
property stolen from that store. Further, I do not consider that fines are appropriate
sentence orders in this matter. Any orders requiring Mr Baxter to make reparation, or to
meet a financial penalty, would be futile.
17․	The significant impact on the victims of the aggravated burglary is borne out in a victim
impact statement from the occupants of the residence. They describe difficulties with
sleeping and leaving the house from fears of someone breaking into their home. There
have been impacts on their ability to work, and undertake day to day family activities,
with the children also afraid. There have been impacts on their mental health with one
of the occupants describing no longer feeling safe. She describes that the offending still
affects their everyday life, and she hopes that the offenders understand the emotional
and psychological impact their actions have had on the family. I observe that the victim
impact statement also describes the significant financial impacts, and distress from the
theft of sentimental items. I do so only to acknowledge this impact on the victims in this
regard, with it not been of relevance for the sentencing exercise of Mr Baxter given the
charge for this offending.
18․	It is plain that all of the offending that occurred on this date warrants a term of
imprisonment to give effect to the purposes of sentencing, including deterrence and
denunciation of the conduct.
19․	The co-offender is yet to be sentenced for these offences.

7 September 2023 offending

20․	On 7 September 2023, Mr Baxter drove a stolen Ford Ranger into the Coles Express
service station in Charnwood. The vehicle had been stolen six days previously. The
Ford Ranger had numberplates that did not belong to the Ranger and that had been
reported stolen the day before.
21․	Mr Baxter got out the car and filled it with $119.58 of diesel, before driving off without
paying. The amount taken is relatively significant for this type of offence, and any
offending of this type warrants a deterrent sentence.
22․	A passing unmarked police vehicle recognised the Ranger as stolen and followed it from
the service station. The police did not activate their lights or initiate a pursuit.
Nonetheless, Mr Baxter accelerated heavily and crossed to the wrong side of the road
to overtake a bus before disappearing from sight of the police. In doing so, his driving
was clearly dangerous, involving both a level of speed and being on the incorrect side of
the road, which put other road users at risk. It was not though dangerous driving for an
extended period and there were no passengers. It is a less serious example of this type
of offending. He was driving a stolen motor vehicle at the time, but this is separately
charged. The owner of the vehicle was without the vehicle for an extended period,
although it is not clear that it was being driven by Mr Baxter for that period.
23․	He was again driving while disqualified, as a repeat offender, evidencing a blatant
disregard for the privileges that a driver’s license affords and the risk to other road users
from driving in such circumstances.
24․	Where imprisonment is an available penalty for the offending on this date, I am satisfied
that, having considered possible alternatives, no penalty other than imprisonment is
appropriate.

8 September 2023 offending

25․	On 8 September 2023 at about 1pm, two female community members were sitting in
their cars having a lunch break in the carpark of an Early Learning Centre in Wanniassa.
26․	Mr Baxter pulled into the carpark. He was driving a Subaru SV which had been stolen
from a location in Ngunnawal on 5 August 2023. The numberplates on the vehicle did
not belong to the Subaru and had been stolen from a vehicle in the days immediately
before.
27․	Mr Baxter parked the car horizontally across the parking spaces. He got out of the
vehicle. He was naked. He stood facing the two community members. He appeared to
be holding his penis. He then rested his forehead on the top of the car door frame. He then withdrew a pink blanket from the boot of the Subaru and wrapped it around his
waist.
28․	One of the community members called the police. As she did this, Mr Baxter drove away.
The community member followed him until he pulled into a driveway in Monash. He left
a note at this residence, before driving away. The driving of the stolen vehicle was again
conduct involving blatant disregard for the property of other community members, with
Mr Baxter driving the vehicle across multiple suburbs.
29․	It was later ascertained that the note left at the residence included a detail that identified
Mr Baxter as the driver of the Subaru, and as having committed the act of indecent
exposure.
30․	The information before the Court includes that Mr Baxter does not remember the
exposure conduct and that he was shocked when his lawyer informed him of the charge.
He describes that the only reason he could think of for the behaviour was that he was
urinating as he does not think he would have otherwise gotten out of the car while naked.
The description of the offending conduct is not inconsistent with it occurring as Mr Baxter
supposes, albeit the facts do not describe an act of urination occurring.
31․	The act of indecent exposure was, in all of the circumstances, an example of this offence
that is of low objective seriousness, and one done with low moral culpability. It is not
what would be regarded as a typical form of this offence, albeit deterrence remains of
relevance as any offence of this nature risks causing, and did on this occasion cause,
concern to community members. Here, that extends to there having been a risk to
children being exposed to the offending conduct. I am satisfied, having considered
possible alternatives, that no penalty other than imprisonment is warranted to give effect
to deterrence, but it will be for a nominal period only.
32․	At about 4:55pm the same day, Mr Baxter was observed by police in Greenway. He was
standing on the rear tray of the Ford Ranger that he had been driving the day before.
This vehicle was again bearing stolen numberplates.
33․	Police approached Mr Baxter and attempted to apprehend him. He got in the vehicle
and started to drive away. Police smashed the front driver’s side window and discharged
a taser, which had little effect. Mr Baxter drove off.
34․	Police activated emergency lights and sirens and began to pursue the vehicle. Mr Baxter
failed to stop. He mounted a nearby curb and drove over the footpath onto Anketell
Street, then right onto Soward Way. He used the left hand lane to execute a right turn
through a red light onto Athlon Drive, travelling at speeds in excess of 124km/h in a 60km/h zone. Mr Baxter continued on Athlon Drive, reaching speeds in excess of
130km/h and weaving in and out of traffic, before he entered a greenbelt adjacent to
Jenke Circuit in Kambah and evaded police. It was lightly raining at the time.
35․	This is a serious example of this form of aggravated dangerous driving. The aggravating
feature that accounts for the applicable maximum penalty is the speeds involved. In
addition, Mr Baxter failed to stop for police, with this relevant as a part of the
dangerousness of the driving rather than as a particular of the charge increasing the
maximum penalty. Nonetheless, this aspect elevates the seriousness as Mr Baxter’s
driving put not only other road users at risk, but also police officers. In addition, there
were manoeuvres done during the driving that are of concern. The driving was for a
relatively lengthy period on roads that were likely busy with traffic and with poor road
conditions. Fortunately, there were no passengers.
36․	Mr Baxter was again driving a stolen vehicle, and as a result of the driving of the vehicle
on this day it was damaged. The facts provide that the Ranger was recovered on 13
September 2023, having been abandoned at a location in Tharwa. The front driver’s
side window had been replaced with a sheet of fibreglass and adhesive tape. Forensic
analysis linked Mr Baxter to the vehicle. He was, again, driving the stolen vehicle as a
disqualified driver.
37․	Plainly, no penalty other than imprisonment is appropriate for the offending on this day
where imprisonment is an available maximum penalty.

15 September 2023 offending

38․	On 15 September 2023 at about 1:46pm, police on a routine patrol encountered Mr
Baxter again driving the stolen Subaru. He was at the intersection of Follet Street and
McMaster Street in Scullin. The numberplates on the vehicle did not belong to the
Subaru, having been stolen in the previous days from a car that was at a repair shop.
39․	Police began to follow the Subaru, and it travelled at speeds in excess of 75km/h. Mr
Baxter drove the vehicle in a manner such that it mounted a footpath. The boot of the
vehicle opened, and items began to spill out.
40․	Police activated their lights and sirens, but Mr Baxter failed to stop and continued up the
footpath. He then continued up the street, reaching a maximum speed of 100km/h in a
60km/h area. He then travelled through multiple other streets at a maximum speed of
80km/h in a 50km/h area. Police terminated the pursuit in Hawker out of concern for the
speed of the vehicle and the proximity of a school. There is no suggestion there were
passengers in the vehicle.
41․	For the offending on this date, Mr Baxter is again charged with a form of aggravation
relating to the speed involved. The driving did though again involve the aspect of
dangerousness of failing to stop for police. Police and other road users were put at risk,
including on this occasion by driving on a footpath for an extended period. The risk to
community members is highlighted by the reasoning of police to terminate the pursuit.
Mr Baxter was again driving a stolen vehicle, plainly continuing to have access to the
same stolen vehicle without any regard for the inconvenience to the owner from his
driving of their vehicle. He was also, again, a repeat disqualified driver.

17 and 21 September 2023 offending

42․	On 17 September 2023 at about 5:15pm, Mr Baxter drove the stolen Subaru into the
carpark of the Bunnings in Belconnen. The numberplates were again plates that did not
belong to the Subaru, having been stolen from a vehicle on 15 September 2023.
43․	The Subaru was parked nose in, into a parking space. Uniformed police parked an
unmarked vehicle at the rear of the Subaru to box it in, and the officers approached the
Subaru on foot from either side of the vehicle.
44․	Police deployed a tyre deflation device behind the front wheel and yelled “stop, police”
at Mr Baxter. Mr Baxter began to drive off despite the close proximity of the police.
Police discharged a taser multiple times, but this was ineffective.
45․	Mr Baxter drove the Subaru in such a way that it mounted a concrete block, causing the
rear hatch to open and items to spill into the carpark. He then collided with a stationery
Honda CRV, causing nominal damage that was repaired without cost. Despite it not
having financial implications for the owner of the vehicle, the need for repairs would have
caused inconvenience, as well as the distress from the circumstances of the collision.
46․	Mr Baxter exited the carpark at speed. Police deployed another tyre deflation device, but
the Subaru was again driven in a way that mounted a curb, and he avoided the deflation
device. Mr Baxter drove through a red light onto Belconnen Way and evaded the police.
47․	This was a determined effort by Mr Baxter to avoid police, one that put the police officers
at high risk to their safety. They were in a vulnerable position at the time Mr Baxter first
began to drive off. The risk to the safety of police was continued, as Mr Baxter continued
in his efforts to avoid police. The location of the driving suggests that other community
members were also put at risk, but fortunately no passengers were involved. The period
of driving was not lengthy. Nonetheless, the seriousness of this form of aggravated
dangerous driving warrants a strongly deterrent sentence. Mr Baxter was again driving
a stolen vehicle during the offending, and he was a repeat disqualified driver. His driving
on this occasion seemingly caused damage to the Subaru.
48․	On 21 September 2023, police located Mr Baxter at an address in Higgins. He was in
possession of the Subaru key fob, amounting to the offence of unlawful possession of
stolen property.
49․	The Subaru vehicle itself was left in a street in O’Connor. The facts provide that it was
destroyed in a fire set by another person on 21 September 2023. While Mr Baxter is not
responsible for the destruction of this vehicle, he seemingly had control of the vehicle for
a lengthy period of time during the course of the offences, and had a role in causing
significant inconvenience, and likely financial implications, for the owner of the vehicle.
50․	The offences on these days are such that the only appropriate penalty is one of
imprisonment, where such a penalty is an available sentencing option.
51․	It is appropriate though that the penalty for the unlawful possession of the Subaru key
be served in such a way that reflects that it was offending related to the driving of the
stolen vehicle. The totality principle is plainly of relevance in the entire sentencing
exercise, having regard to the offences for each day having aspects of common features,
and that the offending that occurred in September 2023, while on separate days, involves
a level of being a ‘crime spree’. This will be reflected in the sentences to be imposed
with concurrency as appropriate.

Subjective circumstances

52․	Mr Baxter is now 37 years of age, and he was aged 35 years at the time of the offending.
He is of Maori and Torres Strait Islander descent on his mother’s side. He was born in
Canberra and describes a positive upbringing with happy and loving parents. From the
age of 18 years, he resided in New Zealand for two years for cultural reasons and to take
care of his grandmother. He has family in both New Zealand and Canberra and has
positive relationships with them. This includes with his parents and siblings.
53․	Mr Baxter completed his year 10 certificate and has obtained various work-related
certificates. He previously had his own painting and construction business that had five
employees. He is able to return to building work upon his release from custody, but
understands that upon release, the priority is to address his drug dependency and
become stable within the community. He has a history of engagement in prosocial
activities including sports, and has intentions to resume this in the community.
54․	Mr Baxter is currently single and has three children from previous relationships. One of
his children resides with his parents in Canberra. Upon release from custody, Mr Baxter
intends to reside at this home. This proposed residential arrangement has been assessed as likely suitable by ACT Corrective Services, with this to be confirmed by the
time Mr Baxter will reside at the address.
55․	Mr Baxter’s mother speaks of her son’s potential as a young person, his connection to
his culture, and his contributions to community organisations. She describes the turning
point that led to his drug dependency and the descent into offending behaviour. Despite
this, when in the community he is a caring father. Mr Baxter’s mother describes her hope
that her son can complete long term rehabilitation and “get back to his old self”.
56․	Mr Baxter commenced using substances as an adolescent, beginning with cannabis. He
went on to use other substances throughout his early adulthood, and came to be
dependent on opioids after he sustained an injury. When he was aged 28 years, he first
used methylamphetamine and he describes that it quickly became problematic for him
and led to his first entry into custody. He describes that he was spending time with “the
wrong crowd” and was using drugs as a personal escape. From 29 years of age, he
began to use heroin, and subsequently gamma hydroxybutyrate. He has experienced
mental health concerns in the context of this substance use.
57․	Mr Baxter’s criminal history reflects this description of his substance dependency. While
his history does include minor offending throughout his adulthood, his serious offending
escalated from when he was 28 years of age. From that time, his criminal history reflects
offences including driving of stolen motor vehicles, driving offending, firearm offending,
and minor drug offences. Notably, he has not been previously convicted of an offence
in the nature of burglary. Overall, his criminal history is relatively limited for someone
with the addiction history that he has. It is such though that the opportunity for leniency
is limited. Further, the criminal history reflects that Mr Baxter was on conditional liberty
at the time of the offending, with this an aggravating factor on sentence.
58․	On 20 December 2022, Mr Baxter was sentenced to an 11 month intensive correction
order, which was to expire on 19 November 2023. The SAB issued a warrant of his
arrest after he failed to attend hearings on 23 March and 27 April 2023. The order was
cancelled on 26 September 2023, and he was ordered to serve a period of imprisonment.
59․	That the offending here occurred while Mr Baxter was subject to an intensive correction
order is of significance to ACT Corrective Services in reaching their recommendation
that Mr Baxter is not suitable for a treatment order. Corrective Services caution that Mr
Baxter’s history of non-compliance and reoffending while subject to community based
orders indicates that he may “struggle to comply” with a treatment order.
60․	This finding is to be balanced against information which suggests Mr Baxter does have
a capability to comply with community based orders when his substance dependency is addressed. He was a productive member of the community for an extended period
before he became dependent on substances and consequently engaged in concerning
offending behaviour.
61․	Further, he has in the past successfully completed supervision orders. In 2012, he
successfully completed a good behaviour order. In 2021, he was subject to a parole
order during which he reports not using substances. Mr Baxter describes that it was
after he finished that order that he “fell off”, and he returned to negative associates and
substance use.
62․	ACT Corrective Services describe that while Mr Baxter did complete the parole order, he
was breached during the course of the order, and that there was an occasion of drug
driving offending. It is apparent from his criminal history though that it was, as Mr Baxter
describes, not until after the parole order concluded that he returned to more serious
offending. Of further consistency with Mr Baxter’s description of his reasons for
non-compliance with court orders, is his explanation for non-compliance with the
intensive correction order. This is that he was using substances “the whole time”, was
“too far in”, and was not thinking clearly. It is apparent that there is a direct correlation
between Mr Baxter’s substance use and his offending behaviour.
63․	On behalf of Mr Baxter, it was submitted that the origin of his addiction, being opioid
drugs for medical treatment, is such that his addiction is a mitigating factor: R v
Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; 46 NSWLR 346 at [273]. I am not satisfied of this for two
reasons. Firstly, Mr Baxter was engaging in substance use, and minor criminal
offending, prior to his exposure to opioids. Secondly, the extent of information available
as to this is Mr Baxter’s self-reporting. I am not prepared to make the finding sought on
the basis of such limited information. That Mr Baxter committed these offences while
substance affected is an aggravating factor, particularly as it relates to the risk he
exposed other road users, and the police, to during the driving offending.
64․	In relation to the offending the subject of sentence, Mr Baxter describes that he was
heavily addicted to substances at that time and that this offending was motivated by
trying to get more drugs. He describes that he was “not himself” during this period, that
he was in a drug psychosis, and does not clearly recall the offending.
65․	While in custody, Mr Baxter returned negative results for illicit substances from testing
that occurred in November and December 2023, and in March 2024. While his behaviour
in custody is described as being mixed, there is no suggestion this relates to substance
misuse.
66․	The information available to the Court suggests that Mr Baxter is capable of achieving
rehabilitation from drug dependency and offending behaviour, but that his difficulty in the
past has been with maintaining compliance with supervision and with achieving
longer-term rehabilitation. A treatment order is a form of order that is intended to address
such a circumstance. Addressing substance dependency, through a treatment order,
remedies issues of compliance. It provides comprehensive support and oversight for an
extended period, with flexibility to extend the treatment and supervision part of the order
if therapeutically indicated. Accordingly, while I acknowledge the concerns raised by
ACT Corrective Services, I am satisfied that a treatment order will provide a mechanism
that will support Mr Baxter’s ability to comply with, and successfully complete, a
community-based order.
67․	Additionally, Mr Baxter has a level of remorse and insight into the offending that is
indicative of his being motivated to put an end to the risk he poses to the community. He
is described as having apologised during the assessments for endangering the public
and the police, and he acknowledged the risks of his behaviour towards the community.
68․	I am satisfied that Mr Baxter is genuinely motivated to rehabilitate such that he will benefit
from a treatment order. While in custody, he has attended a number of programs,
including for alcohol and drug rehabilitation, and he describes an intention to complete a
Certificate III in Drug and Alcohol or Community services in the future. He has distanced
himself from negative acquaintances and has available to him prosocial associates while
in the community.
69․	To ACT Health Services, Mr Baxter stated his goals include to get his “life back on track”,
to work, play football, and to be a better father. ACT Health Services find Mr Baxter
suitable for a treatment order. It is recommended by that service that Mr Baxter initially
complete a residential rehabilitation program, and he has been assessed as suitable for
an available program. The recommendation is that the treatment and supervision part
of the order be for a period of 12 to 18 months.

Pleas of guilty

70․	The charges for the 2 May 2023 offending were initially the subject of a not guilty plea in
the Magistrates Court and the matters listed for hearing. In advance of the hearing date,
Mr Baxter entered pleas of guilty and the matters were committed for sentence to the
Supreme Court for the purposes of assessment for a treatment order. While not at the
earliest stage, the pleas of guilty do reflect some utilitarian value warranting a reduction
in the sentence that would otherwise have been imposed. I assess the appropriate
reduction to be in the order of 20 per cent.
71․	As to the remaining charges, other than charge CAN 2024/4151, the matters proceeded
through the Magistrates Court with a plea of not guilty. After the brief of evidence was
available and negotiations occurred, Mr Baxter entered a plea of guilty and the matters
were committed for sentence to the Supreme Court. The appropriate reduction on
sentence is again in the order of 20 per cent.
72․	In respect to charge CAN 2024/4151, a plea of guilty was entered at the mention stage
in the Magistrates Court prior to any plea of not guilty. If a term of imprisonment is
imposed, a reduction in the order of 25 per cent would be warranted.
73․	In the application of the discounts, a level of rounding will be applied as necessary in the
interests of achieving comprehensible sentencing orders.

Presentence custody

74․	Mr Baxter was arrested on the day of the last offence, being 21 September 2023. His
bail was refused. As observed above, on 26 September 2023 the Sentence
Administration Board cancelled his intensive correction order, and he was required to
serve the remainder of that order in custody. This was for a period of 6 months and 19
days imprisonment, from 26 September 2023 until 13 April 2024. From 14 April 2024,
Mr Baxter has been remanded in custody solely in respect to the charges the subject of
sentence. A total of 308 days has been spent on remand solely in respect to these
charges.
75․	While the period that Mr Baxter has spent in custody since 21 September 2023 is not
solely attributable to the offences the subject of sentence, it is not irrelevant to have
regard to Mr Baxter having now spent a continuous period in custody of some two years
and five months. He has had a lengthy period in which to reflect on his previous offending
behaviour, and is well aware of the consequences if he does not take a different course
upon release. I am satisfied that this period in custody has contributed to deterring Mr
Baxter from further offending.

Treatment order

76․	As observed above, the prosecution does not oppose the imposition of a treatment order.
This includes that the prosecution concedes that a total effective sentence, taking into
account the time already served in custody, is within range in this matter: s 34AA
Sentencing Act. I agree, and accordingly, Mr Baxter meets the threshold considerations
for a treatment order: s 12A(a), (b)(ii), (c) Sentencing Act.
77․	I am satisfied that Mr Baxter meets the requirements as to his drug dependency, and the
role of substances in the offending, and that he will live in the ACT for the term of the sentence, as required by s 12A(2)(a) of the Sentencing Act. I am otherwise satisfied
that the order is appropriate taking into account the relevant sentencing considerations,
the object of such an order, and that no concerns are raised as to a victim’s safety or
welfare: s 12A(2)(b) Sentencing Act. Mr Baxter has given the requisite informed consent
for such an order: s 12A(c) Sentencing Act.
78․	The essential query becomes whether a treatment order is suitable for Mr Baxter:
ss 80S(a), 80T Sentencing Act. I have carefully considered all of the available
information, including the concerns raised by ACT Corrective Services and the indicators
of unsuitability provided in table 46K of the Sentencing Act.
79․	In this regard, on behalf of Mr Baxter, the Court’s attention was drawn to what was said
by King CJ in Vartzokas v Zanker (1989) 51 SASR 277 at 279. I agree that those
observations are relevant here. That is:

Rehabilitation as an object of sentencing is aimed at the renunciation by the offender of his wrongdoing and his establishment or re-establishment as an honourable law-abiding citizen. It is not confined to those who fall into wrongdoing by reason of physical or mental infirmity or a disadvantaged background. It applies equally to those who, while not suffering such disadvantages, nevertheless lapse into wrongdoing.

The object of the courts is to fashion sentencing measures designed to reclaim such individuals wherever such measures are consistent with the primary object of the criminal law which is the protection of the community. Very often a person who is not disadvantaged and whose character has been formed by a good upbringing, but who has lapsed into criminal behaviour, will be a good subject for rehabilitative measures precisely because he possesses the physical and mental qualities and, by reason of his upbringing, the potential moral fibre to provide a sound basis for rehabilitation. It would be a great mistake to put considerations of rehabilitation aside in fashioning a sentence for such a person.

80․ The promotion of the rehabilitation of an offender is a relevant sentencing

purpose: s 7(1)(d) Sentencing Act. Here, the promotion of Mr Baxter’s rehabilitation is

also the measure that will, ultimately, fulfill the sentence purpose of community

protection: s 7(1)(c) Sentencing Act. A treatment order, with the onerous requirements

and close supervision that it is involves, will also bring accountability and deterrence to

Mr Baxter for his offending behaviour: s 7(1)(b), (e) Sentencing Act.

81․ I am satisfied a treatment order is both an appropriate and suitable one.

License disqualification orders

82․	It is open to the court to order that the automatic periods of license disqualification that
are to be imposed be served concurrently: DPP v Holder (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 167 at
[94]. Typically, an ability to secure the return of a driver’s license is important for fulfilling
the sentencing purpose of promotion of an offender’s rehabilitation. A driver’s license
often facilitates an offender’s capability to engage with employment.
83․	In Mr Baxter’s circumstances though, he has repeatedly driven while disqualified, with a
criminal history of driving offending indicative of a complete disregard for the privilege
that a license entails and respect for other road users. There has been flagrant disregard
for the court’s expectation as to compliance with license disqualification orders. There
is no basis upon which to afford Mr Baxter significant leniency in this regard. I will enable
a measure of concurrency to the disqualification periods with a view to supporting Mr
Baxter’s longer term rehabilitation, but a lengthy period of license disqualification will
remain.

Orders

84.     For those reasons, the following orders are made:

Sentence served:

(1)	On the charge of drive motor vehicle without consent (CAN 2023/9249), the
offender is convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, reduced from 5
months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8 April
2024 and end on 7 August 2024.

(2) On the charge of aggravated dangerous driving (repeat offender) (CAN

2023/9256), the offender is convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment,

reduced from 8 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to

commence on 8 May 2024 and end on 7 November 2024.

(3)	On the charge of drive while disqualified (repeat offender) (CAN 2023/9253),
the offender is convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, reduced
from 5 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on
8 August 2024 and end on 7 December 2024.
(4)	On the charge of number plate issued for another vehicle (CAN 2023/9261), the
offender is convicted and no penalty is imposed.
(5)	The total period of imprisonment of 8 months, commencing 8 April 2024 and
ending 7 December 2024, is taken to have been served.

Sentenced to:

(6)	On the charge of aggravated burglary (CAN 2023/5928), the offender is
convicted and sentenced to 10 months imprisonment, reduced from 12 months
imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8 December
2024 and end on 7 October 2025.
(7)	On the charge of take motor vehicle without consent (joint commission) (CAN
2023/5898), the offender is convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment,
reduced from 8 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to
commence on 8 August 2025 and end on 7 February 2026.
(8)	On the charge of drive while disqualified (repeat offender) (CAN 2023/5901),
the offender is convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment, reduced from
40 days imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8
February 2026 and end on 7 March 2026.
(9)	On the charge of minor theft (CAN 2023/5900), the offender is convicted and
sentenced to 1 month imprisonment, reduced from 40 days imprisonment on
account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8 March 2026 and end on 7 April
2026.

(10) On the charge of drive motor vehicle without consent (CAN 2023/9246), the

offender is convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, reduced from 5

months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8 April

2026 and end on 7 August 2026.

(11)	On the charge of dangerous driving (CAN 2023/9255), the offender is convicted
and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, reduced from 5 months imprisonment
on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8 May 2026 and end on 7
September 2026.

(12) On the charge of drive while disqualified (repeat offender) (CAN 2023/9277),

the offender is convicted and sentenced to 2 months imprisonment, reduced

from 75 days imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8

August 2026 and end on 7 October 2026.

(13)	On the charge of numberplate issued for another vehicle (CAN 2023/9259), the
offender is convicted and no penalty is imposed.
(14)	On the charge of make off without payment (CAN 2023/9276), the offender is
convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment, reduced from 40 days
imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8 October 2026
and end on 7 November 2026.

(15) On the charge of drive motor vehicle without consent (CAN 2024/4152), the

offender is convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, reduced from 5

months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8

October 2026 and end on 7 February 2027.

(16)	On the charge of indecent exposure (CAN 2024/4151), the offender is convicted
and sentenced to the rising of the Court.

(17) On the charge of drive motor vehicle without consent (CAN 2023/9248), the

offender is convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, reduced from 7

months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8

December 2026 and end on 7 June 2027.

(18) On the charge of aggravated dangerous driving (repeat offender) (CAN

2023/9254), the offender is convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment,

reduced from 8 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to

commence on 8 March 2027 and end on 7 September 2027.

(19) On the charge of drive while disqualified (repeat offender) (CAN 2023/9252),

the offender is convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment, reduced

from 4 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on

8 July 2027 and end on 7 October 2027.

(20)	On the charge of numberplate issued for another vehicle (CAN 2023/9260), the
offender is convicted and no penalty is imposed.

(21) On the charge of drive motor vehicle without consent (CAN 2023/9250), the

offender is convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, reduced from 7

months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on 8

October 2027 and end on 7 April 2028.

(22) On the charge of aggravated dangerous driving (repeat offender) (CAN

2023/9257), the offender is convicted and sentenced to 8 months imprisonment,

reduced from 10 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to

commence on 8 February 2028 and end on 7 October 2028.

(23) On the charge of drive while disqualified (repeat offender) (CAN 2023/9278),

the offender is convicted and sentenced to 5 months imprisonment, reduced

from 6 months imprisonment on account of the plea of guilty, to commence on

8 June 2028 and end on 7 November 2028.

(24)	On the charge of numberplate issued for another vehicle (CAN 2023/9262), the
offender is convicted and no penalty is imposed.
(25)	On the charge of unlawful possession of stolen property (CAN 2023/9266), the
offender is convicted and no penalty is imposed.

Drug and alcohol treatment order

(26) A Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order pursuant to s 12A of the Crimes

(Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) is made for Daniel Jol Baxter, in respect of the

eligible offences set out in Orders 6-25, of which Daniel Jol Baxter has been

convicted, and for which he has been sentenced for a total term of 3 years, 11

months imprisonment.

(27) The drug and alcohol treatment order be for 3 years, 8 months, 29 days.

(28) The Custodial Part of the drug and alcohol treatment order for the eligible

offences be suspended under s 80W of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005

(ACT) from 10 February 2025 until 7 November 2028.

(29)	The Treatment and Supervision Part of the drug and alcohol treatment order be
for 18 months, to commence on 10 February 2025 and end on 9 August 2026.
(30)	Under s 80ZA of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), Daniel Jol Baxter be
required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offender’s Good Behaviour
obligations under s 85 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT)
from the day after the end of the Treatment and Supervision Part of the Drug
and Alcohol Treatment Order, 10 August 2026, until the end of the total
sentence, 7 November 2028, with a probation condition that he accept
supervision by the Commissioner of ACT Corrective Services or his delegate
for the period of the undertaking or such lesser period as the person supervising
him considers appropriate and obey all reasonable directions of the person
supervising him.
(31)	For the Treatment and Supervision Part of the drug and alcohol treatment order:

(a) The core conditions of the order set out in s 80Y of the Crimes

(Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) be hereby imposed.

(b) Daniel Jol Baxter undertake any program, treatment or counselling,

alcohol and drug testing or case management, and comply with any

direction as to where he resides, or any curfew that may be required,

by any member of the Treatment and Supervision Team and obey all

reasonable directions of any member of that Team.

(c) If Daniel Jol Baxter is discharged from or leaves any treatment

program, he is to report to ACT Corrective Services by 4:00pm on the

next business day.

(d) Daniel Jol Baxter not return a positive test sample under alcohol and

drug testing.

(e) Daniel Jol Baxter not consume or use alcohol, cannabis, illicit drugs

and prescription drugs not prescribed to him.

(f) Daniel Jol Baxter comply with any directions of the Court from time to

time about attendance at Court in person or by electronic means.

(32) Daniel Jol Baxter be directed to sign a sealed copy of this Order and an

undertaking to comply with the Order and any obligations under the Crimes

(Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for the period that this Order is in

force before he leaves the Court precincts on 10 February 2025.

(33)	Daniel Jol Baxter be directed to appear in Court for DASL Review in person or
by AVL on Tuesday, 18 February 2025 at 12:30pm.

Licence disqualification

(34)	In relation to CAN 2023/5901 an automatic licence disqualification period of 24
months applies, to commence on 10 February 2025.
(35)	In relation to CAN 2023/9277 an automatic licence disqualification period of 24
months applies, to commence 10 August 2026.
(36)	In relation to CAN 2023/9252 an automatic licence disqualification period of 24
months applies, to commence 10 February 2028.
(37)	In relation to CAN 2023/9253 an automatic licence disqualification period of 24
months applies, to commence 10 August 2029.
(38)	In relation to CAN 2023/9278 an automatic licence disqualification period of 24
months applies, to commence 10 February 2031.
(39)	In relation to CAN 2023/9254 an automatic licence disqualification period of 12
months applies, to commence on 10 November 2032.
(40)	In relation to CAN 2023/9256 an automatic licence disqualification period of 12
months applies, to commence on 10 August 2033.
(41)	In relation to CAN 2023/9255 an automatic licence disqualification period of 3
months applies, to commence on 10 March 2035.

(42) The total period of licence disqualification is 10 years and 4 months, to

commence on 10 February 2025 and end on 9 June 2035.

I certify that the preceding eighty-four [84] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence her Honour Acting Justice Christensen

Associate:

Date: 12 February 2025

Unlawful possession of stolen property	6 months imprisonment and/or 50 penalty
s 324(1) Criminal Code	units
CAN 2023/9266

2 May 2023 offending

5․	On 2 May 2023 at about 1:20pm, Mr Baxter and a female co-offender entered a business
premises in Hume. Some 20 minutes later they entered a private residential area at the
rear of the business premises. Mr Baxter was walking in front with the co-offender
following a few metres behind.
6․	They firstly entered an area known as the “homestead”, which is a building that was
undergoing refurbishment.
7․	They then came to be inside a residential premises and went through a number of draws
and cupboards, including cupboards in a child’s bedroom. A number of items of property
were taken, including multiple sets of keys to vehicles, a gaming device, laptop, electric
scooter, three items of jewellery, $70.00 cash, and miscellaneous gift cards. The total
value of the items taken was $4,070.00.
8․	They then left the residence driving a GLX Toyota Prado that belonged to the occupants
of the residence. Any taking of a vehicle is serious, it being an item of high value to the
owner, and the taking of which is likely to cause significant inconvenience and distress.