Director of Public Prosecutions v Carey (a pseudonym)
[2025] VCC 575
•7 May 2025
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| THEO CAREY (A PSEUDONYM) |
---
JUDGE: | Karapanagiotidis | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 1 May 2025 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 7 May 2025 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Carey (a pseudonym) | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2025] VCC 575 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW - Sentencing
Catchwords: burglary – theft of firearms – prohibited person possess a firearm – theft of a motor vehicle
Legislation Cited: ss 5(1), 6AAA, 18X, 18Z Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
Cases Cited:Barry v The Queen [2022] VSCA 94.
Sentence: Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order for a period of 36 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms R. Fleming | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms F. Holmes | Leanne Warren & Associates |
HER HONOUR: =
1Theo Carey,[1] you have pleaded guilty to the following charges on Indictment C2416802:
[1] A pseudonym.
(a) Charge 1 – Burglary
(b) Charge 2 – Theft of firearm
(c) Charge 3 – Prohibited person possess a firearm
(d) Charge 4 – Theft of motor vehicle
2The full circumstances of your offending are outlined in the prosecution opening, marked as Exhibit A on the plea. This constitutes the factual basis upon which I sentence you.
Circumstances of the offending
3At the time of the offending, you were 34 years old, and resided at an address on Illira Avenue, Frankston. You were a prohibited person as defined under the Firearms Act 1996 (Charge 3 – Prohibited Person Possess a Firearm).
4Your co-offender, Dylan Rangel,[2] aged 33 years at the time, was in possession of his girlfriend’s black Holden Vectra.
[2] A pseudonym.
5A further co-accused, is Haywood Welch,[3] aged 38 years old at the relevant time. His matter is listed for a contested committal on 29 July 2025 where he has been granted leave to cross examine both you and Mr Rangel, as you are prosecution witnesses.
[3] A pseudonym.
6In relation to incident 1, the victim was Zachary Weiss[4] who resided at an address on Jane Street, Berwick. Mr Weiss is a holder of a firearms licence and owns firearms. Mr Weiss had previously employed Mr Rangel as a bricklayer through his business. During the course of the employment, Mr Weiss had disclosed to Mr Rangel that he stored firearms at his house.
[4] A pseudonym.
Incident 1 - Burglary at Jane Street, Berwick
7On 6 February 2024, you, Mr Welch and Mr Rangel were together at your residence in Frankston. At some point, Mr Rangel has told you about the presence of firearms at Mr Weiss’s property, and you have then repeated that to Mr Welch. Mr Welch has then initiated a conversation with Mr Rangel about this, and a decision was made to drive to the victim’s house in Berwick.
8As a group you travelled to Berwick in Mr Rangel’s girlfriend’s black Holden Vectra, and at approximately 11:00AM you arrived and parked near the victim’s address. The group exited the vehicle, and you and Mr Welch proceeded to enter the victim’s residence through an unlocked garage roller door (Charge 1 – Burglary).
9Whilst you were inside the garage, Mr Rangel remained outside on the street. He walked up and down the street in order to identify any CCTV cameras in the area.
10Inside the garage was a locked white cabinet that contained firearms, which you jimmied open. The pair of you left the garage with the following items (Charge 2 – Theft of Firearm; Charge 3 – Prohibited Person Possess a Firearm):
(a) AYA 12-Gauge shotgun;
(b) Hollis I & Sons 12-gauge shotgun;
(c) Beretta 12-gauge shotgun;
(d) Two Enfield Military 303 Bolt Action Rifles;
(e) Lithgow 303 Bolt Action Rifle;
(f) Weihrauch Hw87K air rifle .22; and
11You also took a black backpack full of various ammunition, as outlined in the Prosecution opening.
12Your group then returned to the black Holden Vectra and drove to an address at Oberon Road, Carrum Downs at Mr Welch’s instruction, where the stolen property was unloaded into the lounge room (Charge 3 – Prohibited Person Possess a Firearm). Shortly after this, Mr Rangel drove you back to Illira Avenue, Frankston.
Incident 2 - Theft of motor vehicle
13On 10 February 2024, an arrangement was made using Mr Rangel’s Facebook account to meet Mr McLellan and Ms Treharne for the purpose of purchasing drugs. Following this, you, Mr Rangel and Mr Welch drove to Elray Avenue, Dandenong in the black Holden Vectra to attend the meeting spot. You exited the vehicle just prior to reaching the meeting spot.
14Mr Rangel and Mr Welch then parked at the meeting spot on Elray Avenue before the victims arrived in the green Holden Commodore. Mr Rangel exited the Holden Vectra and approached the front passenger side of green Holden Commodore and started talking to the victims through the car door window.
15Whilst this occurred, Mr Welch approached the green Holden Commodore brandishing a firearm and pointing it at the victims, causing them to exit the car. Neither you nor Mr Rangel had agreed for this to occur.
16You then arrived at the location and entered the passenger seat of the victim’s car while Mr Welch got in the driver’s seat. At this point, you knew that the car was stolen (Charge 4 – Theft). Mr Rangel returned to the black Vectra and both cars drove away in convoy, leaving the victims on the side of the road.
17The two vehicles travelled to the 7-Eleven on the corner of Kingsclere Street and Cheltenham Road, Dandenong. You filled the green Holden Commodore with petrol, and then proceeded to pay for the fuel and other items before returning to the front passenger seat of the victim’s vehicle. Both vehicles then continued travelling in convoy back to Mr Carey’s residence at Illira Avenue, Frankston.
18Shortly after, Mr Welch then moved the victim’s car to another location.
Arrests and Interviews
19On 22 February 2024, police executed a search warrant at the Illira Avenue, Frankston address where Mr Rangel was subsequently arrested.
20On 23 February 2024 Mr Welch was arrested at a Woolston Drive, Frankston address and transported to Dandenong Police Station.
21On 14 March 2024, police executed another search warrant at the Illira Avenue, Frankston address where you were subsequently arrested.
22You were transported to Dandenong Police Station, where you made admissions in relation to the events on 6 February 2024 and denied any involvement in an aggravated carjacking on 10 February 2024. You then voluntarily provided a signed police statement about the events on 6 and 10 February 2024.
Further investigations
23Following further police investigation, the stolen green Holden Commodore was recovered at Jason Place, Frankston and was subsequently towed.
24None of the stolen firearms have been recovered.
Gravity of offending
25The offences before the Court are serious as indicated by the prescribed maximum penalties. In respect of the burglary, you in company with others, attended Mr Weiss’s residential address and intruded and entered his garage. You assisted in forcing open the cabinet where Mr Weiss’s guns were kept. You and Mr Welch then removed the firearms from the property and delivered them to Mr Welch’s address, while being driven by Mr Rangel who was standing outside canvassing for CCTV cameras.
26I accept the prosecution submission that there was a degree of planning involved in both incidents, in targeting the first victim’s property and then arranging to meet up with the second victim.
27In respect of the theft of firearms, as submitted by the prosecution, this is considered a ‘particularly serious kind of theft’ as indicated by its maximum sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment. In Barry v the Queen[5] , the Court stated that the theft of firearms ‘contributes to the illegitimate flow of firearms in the community and in turn, may facilitate serious criminal activity.’
[2022] VSCA 94.
28In your case, there is no actual evidence that the stolen firearms were associated with other criminal activity. However, the offence is serious because of the inherent risks just referred to and also because the theft was of seven firearms, none of which have been located and likely remain in circulation in the community.
29You are a prohibited person under the Firearms Act by virtue of your criminal history. The possession charge is based on the same circumstances as the theft. That is, you stole the firearms and were therefore in possession of them, until you unloaded them at Mr Welch’s home and then left. The principle of totality is particularly important given the complete temporal connection between the offending and will be reflected in the orders for concurrency. There is however still a need to reflect the separate criminality involved in being a prohibited person within the meaning of the Firearms Act.
30The theft of motor vehicle occurred some four days after the first incident. It is not alleged by the prosecution that you were involved with the aggravated carjacking. Rather, you became involved after the victim’s car had been stolen. The prosecution allege that you were aware that the vehicle was stolen when you arrived at the meeting spot and entered the front passenger side. You then refuelled the vehicle at a petrol station before being driven back to your residence by Mr Welch. I note that the green Holden Commodore was recovered by police.
31The prosecution raise particular concern given your prior criminal history though they note, relevantly, in respect of the current offending that you were not the principal offender and there are no allegations of violence on your part. Also, I take into account that while you have an extensive and relevant criminal history, you have no history for firearm related offending.
32Your Counsel submits that while the offending is serious, it occurred during a relapse triggered by personal trauma and a longstanding pattern of substance dependence and institutionalisation. While this provides some context it does not excuse your offending or mitigate your moral culpability.
Plea of guilty
33You pleaded guilty at a relatively early stage. Your case resolved prior to the matter proceeding as a contested committal hearing. Your plea of guilty entitles you to a substantial sentencing discount. It also has utilitarian value and indicates your willingness to facilitate the course of justice and accept responsibility. I also accept that your plea of guilty is indicative of remorse and I take into account your cooperation with police and your provision of a voluntary statement upon arrest, along obviously, with the admissions that you made.
Personal circumstances
34Your personal circumstances were canvassed by your Counsel and are outlined in the reports of Neuropsychologist Martin Jackson of 16 August 2024 and Carla Lechner of 13 December 2024.
35You grew up in the Langwarrin and Frankston areas of Melbourne.
36You grew up in a violent home. Your dad was violent to both your mother and the children. Your parents separated when you were very young.
37Your mother re-partnered when you were about seven years of age and your stepfather was also violent and abusive. Growing up you were also exposed to substance abuse, telling Ms Lechner that your step-father and father were ‘both alcoholics’ and your father is a ‘drug addict’. You have several siblings and have some contact with an older brother and a younger half-brother.
38At the age of 13 you were put into foster care. You experienced significant behavioural problems at school and were diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and oppositional defiant disorder in around Grade 4. You were prescribed Ritalin which you took up to the age of 18, when you stopped.
39When you were approximately 14 years of age, you report being assaulted, the nature of which is canvased in the reports, by one of the workers when you were in foster care. This resulted in you leaving and ending up on the streets where you started using drugs. You couch surfed until you were 18 or 19 years of age and were continuously in and out of trouble.
40You did not complete Year 7. Over the years you have worked in concreting ‘on and off’ but have been unable to sustain employment given your drug use and offending. Prior to being remanded you were receiving JobSeeker payments from Centrelink and were in the process of being placed on the disability support pension.
41You were involved in a motor vehicle accident on 4 April 2015 and you were an inpatient at the Alfred Hospital from 4 to 7 April 2015. Medical records from Peninsula Health confirm this admission. You also received a head injury in an assault in 2015, as well as having sustained other injuries in another motor vehicle accident.
42In the past you have been diagnosed as having depression and treated with Zoloft. You also report being diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
43You have a history of entrenched drug use. You started using amphetamines (speed) from the age of 14 and then methamphetamine from around the age of 16. You also started using GHB at around the same age and report using ‘a lot’.
44As already noted, you have a prior criminal history dating back to when you were a child for a range of offending, including for dishonesty and violence. You have spent the majority of the last 15 years in custody. Of particular note, on 7 May 2010 and 2 December 2016 you received significant terms of imprisonment for charges including aggravated burglary and intentionally cause injury. You were last released from custody in January/February 2023.
45Upon your release, you reported doing relatively well. You were out for over 12 months which represents one of your longest continuous periods in the community. Initially you lived with your mother and brother and you were on parole for some three months. You were on the buprenorphine program which helped and you worked in flooring for around six months. You commenced a new relationship and obtained your own place and were not using drugs. However, things soon fell apart. Your partner miscarried and you were not coping and relapsed into drug use. You again offended and returned to jail.
Mental health and cognitive functioning
46Mr Jackson undertook a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. Overall, he concludes that you are ‘a man of estimated low average (at least) premorbid abilities.’ Some cognitive functions were intact, such as initial learning and basic planning and organisation. Some performances fell in the borderline range, including general knowledge and attention to visual detail. Performances in the extremely low range included. He summarises as follows:
(a) Immediate memory span.
(b) Initial learning and delayed recall of unstructured information with rapid forgetting on verbal tasks.
(c) Recognition memory on unstructured tasks.
(d) Visuospatial processing.
(e) Some executive skills (visual logical thinking and mental arithmetic).
(f) Impulse control.
47In terms of the possible causes of your cognitive impairments, he considers that some might date back to your ADHD diagnosis as a child, while other areas of impairment strongly suggest impairment of the left frontal lobe and right temporal/parietal lobe of the brain. There is evidence, both in contemporaneous medical records and on assessment, that you sustained a significant traumatic brain injury in early April 2015.
48Mr Jackson found no evidence of any acquired impairment as a result of drug or alcohol use. This was not surprising given that you have spent over a decade in prison and as such, although you have been using drugs and alcohol heavily when you are out, this has been for relatively short periods of time and was unlikely to have produced any permanent impairment.
49The issues with regard to your behaviour are much less clear in terms of the impact of your traumatic brain injury. Clearly, the behavioural issues date back to your early childhood. Mr Jackson opines that -
‘Taking all of this information into account, there is a high possibility that Mr Carey is demonstrating personality traits consistent with a cluster B personality disorder such as borderline personality disorder or antisocial personality disorder. Cluster B personality disorders are marked by impulsive behaviours and a lack of concern or empathy about the impact of the person's behaviour on others. Borderline personality disorder also has additional issues of relationship issues, family issues, drug and alcohol issues etc. It is noted that sexual abuse as a child is often a precursor to borderline personality disorder.’
50Mr Jackson notes the complexity of your personality profile and while suggestive of either borderline or antisocial personality disorder he recommends a comprehensive assessment by a forensic psychiatrist or psychologist.
51In her report Ms Lechner canvasses your history of trauma. She states, ‘he has experienced a range of adverse childhood experiences, including parental substance abuse, domestic violence and sexual abuse whilst in State care. These experiences have given rise to symptoms of Complex PTSD such as chronically low self-esteem, interpersonal mistrust, hypervigilance to situations of conflict or violence … , avoidance (through substance abuse) and emotional and behavioural dysregulation.’ She opines:
‘Mr Carey presents with a complex clinical picture. He currently meets with symptoms of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, features of Borderline Personality Disorder, Stimulant & GHB Use Disorder – in remission in a controlled environment and ADHD. He also has cognitive limitations associated with a traumatic brain injury. Mr Carey therefore requires a nuanced approach to intervention that does not overload him and that is simple and structured in nature.’
52Ms Lechner notes that you are currently housed at the Melbourne Assessment Prison and experienced approximately six months in solitary confinement at Port Phillip Prison. She considers that your limited access to work, programs and yard-time during this time was ‘detrimental to [your] mental health.’
53In custody you take Avanza and an antidepressant. You have seen a psychiatrist whilst in prison and have done a men’s violence course. You are also prescribed methadone.
54Both practitioners understandably raise concerns as to the serious risk of your institutionalisation. You have spent the majority of the last 15 years in prison. You told Ms Lechner, ‘I’m more comfortable in jail, everyone looks at you in the community.’
55I take into account your personal circumstances and your deprived and traumatic history. I accept your Counsels submission that Bugmy principles apply, in a general sense and are relevant to your moral culpability and an assessment of the relevant sentencing principles[6]. While Verdins principles were not advanced on your behalf, and I assess that they are not enlivened, I do take into account the opinions expressed by Ms Lechner and Mr Jackson as to your vulnerabilities and your complex mental health and personality profile[7]. I also take into account and consider that you need intensive supports to assist you in your transition back into the community and to help break the cycle of institutionalisation.
Matters relevant to the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Court Determination Hearing
[6] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.
[7] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102.
On your behalf your Counsel submits that the Court should impose a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order (‘DATO’). The prosecution accept that it is open to the Court to impose the order.
The purposes of a DATO are outlined in s.18X of the Sentencing Act 1991 and are to facilitate your rehabilitation, to take account of your drug or alcohol dependency, to reduce the level of criminality associated with drug or alcohol dependency, and to reduce your health risks associated with drug or alcohol dependency. In considering whether to make such an Order, I must regard your rehabilitation and the protection of the community from you, achieved through your rehabilitation, as having greater importance than other sentencing purposes such as denunciation and general deterrence. Clearly however, general deterrence, specific deterrence, denunciation and community protection remain important considerations, particularly in light of your serious prior criminal history.
The criteria for the making of a DATO are set out in s18Z of the Sentencing Act 1991.
I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that you are dependent on drugs. I take into account the history of your substances use, as canvassed in the reports. Prior to being remanded you told Ms Lechner that you were using excessive amounts of GHB. You also disclosed to the Drug Court clinical adviser using between 1 to 1.7grams of methylamphetamine (ice) daily prior to your remand period and disclosed intravenous use. You scored 41 out of 44 on the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test which indicates that you were likely to have been heavily dependent on drugs over the 12 months prior to your arrest.
I am also satisfied that your dependency contributed to the commission of the offending now before me. I take into account your personal circumstances and the history of your substance use, the diagnosis of Ms Lechner of Stimulant & GHB Use Disorder, currently in remission in a controlled environment and your account of heavy drug use at the time of the offending.
In order to impose a DATO I must also be satisfied that it would otherwise be appropriate to impose a sentence of imprisonment of no more than four years. I have weighed up all relevant considerations, including the gravity of your offending, your prior history, the general sentencing landscape for such offending (including the sentencing statistics provided), the maximum penalties and your plea of guilty and cooperation. While I consider that the only just and appropriate sentence in your case is a substantial term of imprisonment, I consider that it is appropriate to impose a term of no more than four years.
Pursuant to s18Z(3) of Sentencing Act 1991, I must not make a DATO unless satisfied in all the circumstances that it is appropriate to do so. This involves a consideration of your suitability for an intensive Order such as a DATO. I have also read and considered the reports from the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Court assessors (clinical advisor assessment report of 17 April 2025; case management assessment report of 15 April 2025).
The clinical advisor outlines your account of the lead up to the offending and your history of drug use. You identified your relationship, peer environment and limited prosocial support in the community as the primary drivers of your use. You presented with a willingness to engage in treatment and stated that you had spent time reflecting in custody and noted that you wanted to use this opportunity to make a genuine effort to change your life. The assessor considers that you will benefit from engagement in the supports provided by a DATO and that the treatment and supervision component of a DATO would be an appropriate intervention to address your substance use disorder, with recommendations.
The case management report also recommends your suitability for a DATO. In your discussions with the case manager you reflected on your earlier period on parole and that it was not adequately proportionate to the length of time that you had spent incarcerated, stating ‘three months parole after twelve years inside … it should’ve been three years, at least.’ The report canvasses your personal background and circumstances. It notes that should you be released on a DATO you will be referred to emergency accommodation and a dedicated Salvation Army Housing Worker will be assigned to support your transition from custody and reintegration generally. You also indicated that your mother, who I note is present remotely today, and two brothers will be your primary support in the community, should you be sentenced to a DATO. Overall, you demonstrated a willingness to commit and engage with a DATO, citing specifically the benefit you derive from enforced structure and accountability within the context of imposed order conditions. Also, you demonstrated appropriate insight and a genuine interest in learning new skills and strategies to help you address the fundamental issues underpinning your offending.
I have also had regard to the individual treatment plan, which has been devised by the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Court clinical team in conjunction with those named in the individual treatment plan as your care team.
Having considered the criteria for the making of a DATO set out in s18Z of the Sentencing Act 1991, and all of the relevant reports and submissions, I am satisfied that it is appropriate in all the circumstances to make a DATO in your case. I accept your Counsel’s submission that your current willingness to change should be harnessed through the structure and support of a DATO, which will in turn best serve the community interest.
Sentence
67Synthesising all relevant matters, I consider that the only just and appropriate sentence is a term of imprisonment. You are convicted and placed upon a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order (DATO). This order commences today.
68A DATO has two parts: the treatment and supervision part and the custodial part. The treatment and supervision part itself has two parts which are as follows:
69The core conditions, which are that you (s.18ZF):
(a) must not commit, whether in or outside Victoria, another offence punishable on conviction by imprisonment; and
(b) must attend the Drug Court when required by the Drug Court to do so; and
(c) must report to a Melbourne Drug Court House or other specified place within 2 clear working days after the order is made; and
(d) must undergo treatment for drug or alcohol dependency as specified in the order or by the Drug Court.
(e) report to an accept visits from a member(s) of the Drug Court.
(f) must give notice of any change of address within 2 clear working days before the change to a specified Drug Court officer,
(g) must not leave Victoria without the permission of the Drug Court.
(h) must obey all lawful instructions from the Drug Court Team.
70The core conditions will operate for 36 months (3 years) or until further order.
71Alright, do you understand that?
72OFFENDER: Yes.
73HER HONOUR: All right. The second part is the program part, so these are the program conditions that I impose, and I will have you sign this in a moment, that you comply with the individualised treatment plan dated 6 May 2025 and Ms Holmes tells me that you have had an opportunity to go through that with your lawyers?
74OFFENDER: Yeah.
75HER HONOUR: All right, you can see it is a pretty detailed plan and no doubt you have read that what it requires of you. I am going to be very broad in general here, because I am told that you have read it.
76OFFENDER: I haven't read anything
77HER HONOUR: What's that?
78OFFENDER: I haven't read anything.
79HER HONOUR: You haven't read it?
80OFFENDER: No, I've had it read to me.
81HER HONOUR: You've had it read to you.
82OFFENDER: Yeah.
83HER HONOUR: Thank you. It's a fine distinction, but it's a distinction, so thanks for drawing that to my attention. It's been read out to you?
84OFFENDER: Yeah.
85HER HONOUR: Okay. Are you okay with reading and writing?
86OFFENDER: Yeah.
87HER HONOUR: Yes, all right. Well I'm really pleased that your lawyers have read through it, because there's a lot of detail so it might have taken a while for them to do it, but what you can see is that there are weekly case management appointments, drug and alcohol counselling appointments, three times urine testing. It is a very intensive order, all right, and it does require of you that ongoing regular contact and ongoing regular communication. And you can see that in respect of, you know issues to do with housing, mental health, your GP and medical appointments, disclosing information, and coming along to Court reviews on a weekly basis.
88OFFENDER: Yeah.
89HER HONOUR: All right, so you understand what the conditions of the treatment plan are?
90OFFENDER: Yes.
91HER HONOUR: All right, excellent.
92The program conditions, are as follows:
(a) comply with the individualised treatment plan dated 6 May 2025 and signed by you on 7 May 2025.
(b) submit to drug or alcohol testing specified in the order as directed; and
(c) submit to detoxification or other treatment specified in the order (whether or not residential in nature) as directed; and
(d) attend vocational, educational, employment or other programs as directed; and
(e) submit to medical, psychiatric or psychological treatment as directed; and
(f) not associate with co-accused Dylan Rangel; and
(g) reside at accommodation as directed by the DATC team until further order;
(h) comply with a curfew that you remain at the nominated address between 9:00PM and 6:00AM. This curfew is required until further order. So wherever you are placed, Mr Carey, you need to be indoors at that residence between nine and six.
(i) do or not do anything else that the Drug Court considers necessary or appropriate concerning:
(i) your drug and alcohol dependency; and
(ii) the personal factors that the Drug Court considers contributed to your criminal behaviour. That is a really broad condition. Why it is so broad and general is it gives us the flexibility, and that is the Court and the team, to really accommodate your changing needs, okay. What that means is that your conditions can change, all right, and that might be in a way that credits you; it might be in a way that requires some kind of punitive response, I am not sure, but it just gives us that flexibility.
(j) Not use a drug of dependence without lawful authorisation.
(k) Abstain from alcohol.
(l) Not to drive or operate a motor vehicle.
93I am going to make a separate order as well in respect of that. But you are unlicensed, you have never held a licence?
94OFFENDER: I don't even know how to drive a car.
95HER HONOUR: You don't know how to drive?
96OFFENDER: No.
97HER HONOUR: Don't drive one, okay.
98These program conditions will operate for two years or until further Order.
99The custodial part of the DATO is the term of imprisonment that I would have imposed had I note placed on an order, and it is a term of imprisonment of 36 months. This is not to be served unless the Court orders this to occur.
Sentence
100This term is comprised of the following individual sentences:
101Charge 1, the burglary charge, I am convicting you and sentencing you to 15 months' imprisonment.
102Charge 2, theft of firearms, convicted and sentenced to 25 months' imprisonment.
103Charge 3, prohibited person possess firearm, convicted and sentenced to
12 months' imprisonment.104Charge 4, theft of motor vehicle, convicted and sentenced to eight months' imprisonment.
105The orders for cumulation are as follows. Charge 2 is the base sentence. Charge 1, four months' cumulation. Charge 3, three months' cumulation. Charge 4, four months' cumulation. Which Counsel, just double check it for me, should arrive at 36 months, in other words, three years.
106MS HOLMES: Could I just check, Your Honour, what the sentence for
Charge 3 was?107HER HONOUR: Twelve months, I am cumulating three.
108MS HOLMES: Twelve, thank you, yes.
109HER HONOUR: Those orders for cumulation are designed to reflect totality, in particular.
110MS HOLMES: Yes, I certainly get to 36.
111MS FLEMING: Yes, Your Honour, I do as well.
112HER HONOUR: Excellent, all right, thank you.
113On Charge 4, which is a theft of motor vehicle, pursuant to s89(4) of the Sentencing Act, I cancel any licences you hold. You do not hold any. I disqualify you from driving for a period, I am going to make it six months. I have taken into account a range of factors, including that you have been on remand now for a considerable period of time and so I have nominated that period as the appropriate period to interfere with your, at least your ability to obtain a licence.
114Pursuant to s18 I declare, Mr Carey, that you have served 419 days.
115Pursuant to s6AAA, but for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to some four years and three months' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of two years and eight months.
116The ancillary orders - are there any?
117MS FLEMING: There weren't any sought, Your Honour, no.
118HER HONOUR: No, thank you very much. That is all I want to say to you at this stage. If you could take a seat please ...
119HER HONOUR: All right. Counsel, anything further?
120MS FLEMING: No, thank you, Your Honour.
121MS HOLMES: No, Your Honour.
122HER HONOUR: All right, thank you. We will adjourn the Court.
0
3
0