Director of Public Prosecutions v Corey Robert Edwards
[2010] VCC 767
•24 June 2010
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-10-00106
| THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| COREY ROBERT EDWARDS |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE CANNON | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 7 May 2010 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 24 June 2010 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Corey Robert EDWARDS | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [20190] VCC 767 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Catchwords: Burglary – theft – handling stolen goods – reckless conduct endangering serious injury – possession of a drug of dependence.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Prosecution | Mr M Fisher | Craig Hyland, Solicitor for Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Ms Greensill | Doogue & O’Brien |
HER HONOUR:
1 Corey Robert Edwards, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of burglary, three charges of theft, two charges of handling stolen goods, one charge of reckless conduct endangering serious injury and one charge of possession of a drug of dependence.
2 The maximum penalties are as follows:
§ Burglary - ten years’ imprisonment;
§ Theft - ten years’ imprisonment;
§ Handling stolen goods - fifteen years’ imprisonment;
§ Reckless conduct endangering serious injury - five years’ imprisonment;
§ Possession of a drug of dependence - one year imprisonment.
3 Insofar as the current offending is concerned, the learned Prosecutor relied on the Summary of Prosecution Opening (Exhibit A) which was read aloud to the Court. Your counsel indicated that she understood that this was a statement of agreed facts although, on your instruction, took issue with one aspect of this.
4 The circumstances giving rise to your offending were opened as follows:
5 Between 22 August 2009 and 24 August 2009, you gained entry to a car detailing business called ‘Autobuff’ which was located at Factory 1, 3 Torca Terrace, Mornington. With the assistance of at least one unknown co-offender, you forced open the roller door to the factory by bending it upwards [CHARGE 1].
6 Once inside the factory, you gained access to a steel safe and took a set of keys that belonged to a blue 2002 Ford XR8 utility (registration JW 241) valued at $30,000.00. This utility belonged to an employee of ‘Autobuff’, a Mr Jeffery Wintle. You stole the Ford and drove it away from the factory [CHARGE 3].
7 The unknown co-offender removed a number of cars from the factory, namely, a green Mercedes-Benz coupe (registration ACTIVE), a silver 2006 Land Rover (registration UJB 170) and a black 2005 Holden Commodore station wagon (registration WYS 012). Between 22 August 2009 and 24 August 2009, you drove or were a passenger in each of these cars; however, I was told that the Prosecution could not prove that you were involved in the theft of any of these cars. [CHARGE 2].
8 Before you left the factory in the Ford, you put the door to the steel safe in the back of the utility. This safe door belonged to the owner of Autobuff, Mr Christopher Wintle [CHARGE 4].
9 A 12:06am on 25 August 2009, you attended a forklift driver training centre called Spinks Training which was located at 51 Micro Circuit, Dandenong South. You entered the premises by forcing the front door [CHARGE 5]. Once inside the office, you stole two large grey plastic safes that both contained documents related to the business. You stole both safes from the premises [CHARGE 6].
10 At 3:10am on 26 August 2009, you were in the Ford utility that you had previously stolen from Autobuff. Also in the utility was a co-offender (Alyse Thomas). The utility was parked on the side of the road in an industrial area in Berwick when police in a marked police car noticed it during a patrol of the area. As the police approached the utility, you drove away suddenly and quickly. At that point, the police activated the lights and sirens of the police car in an attempt to persuade you to stop.
11 You did not stop and the police commenced a pursuit which lasted for about 12 minutes. The Police Communications Centre was informed of the pursuit and a request was made for additional police assistance. During the pursuit, you failed to stop at a red light and drove at approximately 150 kilometres an hour in Clyde Road, Berwick, which is an 80 kilometre an hour speed zone. You then turned in Thompson’s Road, Berwick, which became a gravel road within a short space of time. At this point, you were driving at approximately 120 kilometres per hour. You then turned into Pound Road, Clyde North, where you pulled away from the police on the dirt road, driving at speeds between approximately 120 and 150 kilometres per hour. You then turned into Ballarto Road, Cardinia, and drove at approximately 140 kilometres per hour in a 60 kilometres per hour zone. Police lost sight of you momentarily.
12 You were then seen driving out of a car park driveway and losing control for a short time with the rear wheels losing traction. At that stage other police cars became involved in the pursuit. You drove towards two oncoming police cars at high speed which caused the police in those cars to take evasive action and move to the side of the road to avoid a collision. You did not slow down at this time. You then reached a speed of approximately 160 kilometres per hour in Ballarto Road which is a 60 kilometres per hour speed zone in that area. A short time later, several police cars were able to surround you as you came to a stop after running out of petrol [CHARGE 8].
13 Following a search of the Ford, police located one of the large grey plastic safes that had been stolen from Spinks Training, the door of the steel safe that had been stolen from Autobuff, black cotton gloves, a cotton bag, a hammer, a screwdriver, a hacksaw, two crowbars and a clear plastic bag that contained approximately two grams of amphetamine [CHARGE 9].
14 In addition, the Ford had Victorian registration plates ‘NIL 837’ attached which had previously been stolen [CHARGE 7].
15 The correct registration plates for the Ford (JW 241) were located inside the Ford.
16 You and your co-offender were both arrested and taken to the Narre Warren Police Station. You participated in a formal Record of Interview during which you made no comment.
17 On your behalf, Ms Greensill took issue with the assertion that you drove towards the two oncoming police cars at “high speed”, but then indicated that on your instruction, you were driving at approximately 70 to 80 kilometres per hour at this stage of this appalling incident. For the purposes of sentencing you, I accept that you were travelling at approximately this speed as you drove towards the two police cars which were forced to avoid you, but in the circumstances, the speed at which you were driving at this time, could still be characterised as “high”. The learned Prosecutor confirmed that the reckless conduct endangering serious injury concerned all of the driving which you performed on that particular day which lasted for approximately 12 minutes, until such time as you ran out of petrol. There was some discussion in the course of the plea in relation to the speed at which you approached the police cars. I was taken to pages 45, 48A and 51 of the police brief in this regard. As I have already said, I am prepared to find that you were travelling at 70 to 80 kilometres per hour, but I still consider this to be a high speed in the circumstances.
18 Although the driving occurred at 3.10 am, you drove at speeds as high as 150 kilometres per hour and at one stage, you went through a red light. Any hapless road users, quite apart from the police who were pursuing you, (as well as your passenger) were endangered by your utter disregard for their presence in the vicinity of your driving.
19 Insofar as the burglary and theft matters are concerned, your commission of these (Charges 1 to 4, having been committed in league with an unknown co-offender) reveal a level of pre-planning, evidenced by the fact that you were apparently equipped with some implement in order to gain entry to each of the premises in respect of each of the burglaries at times that these premises were not occupied. Moreover, following your arrest, black cotton gloves, and various tools were found in the car that you had stolen. Once you had gained access to a steel safe at the factory in Torca Terrace, Mornington, you removed the door of the steel safe and took keys belonging to the car which you then stole. Not only this, but such access, no doubt, enabled your unknown co-offender to remove a number of cars which you either drove or in which you were a passenger in the days that followed. Such behaviour bespeaks a good deal of deliberation and a measure of planning, as did Charges 5 and 6 (burglary and theft at “Spinks Training”).
20 I was told that you were affected by amphetamine when you committed all of these offences. Whilst I accept that this was so, the circumstances of the burglaries, and your ability to steal or handle items of significant value indicates that notwithstanding your affliction, you were able to function at an effective level, selecting or handling items of significant value.
21 Moreover, your sister, Kim Larmour, who gave most impressive evidence on your behalf, frankly indicated to me that prior to this offending, you had spoken at Narcotics Anonymous meetings at which she was present, which revealed a knowledge on your part that when you abused drugs, you committed criminal offences. (Indeed, such insight is confirmed by some sentencing remarks made by His Honour Judge Chettle in September 2006, to which I will refer a little later on). I put your counsel on notice in this regard, indicating that I might well take the view that the fact that you were affected by drugs on the occasions of this offending was an aggravating feature.
22 Ms Greensill reminded me that you had not only consumed amphetamine but she was instructed that you had not taken your medication, namely Deptran and Xanax as at that time, which were medications prescribed for a depressive condition from which you had been suffering for some time. This might well be the case; however, on the basis of the evidence before me, including the numerous dispositions involving counselling and treatment, together with the evidence of your sister, and the sentencing remarks of His Honour Judge Chettle in 2006, to which I will refer in a moment, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that your drug taking on the occasion of this offending, is an aggravating feature. Whilst there may well be an explanation for your decision to return to drug taking – namely, the death of your beloved aunt, the fact that your grandfather was dying, and the trauma which you suffered in May 2009 after you poured petrol into a go-kart, which resulted in an explosion, you took a conscious decision to resume drug taking, knowing that this was a recipe for re-offending.
23 You have admitted the prior convictions recorded in the Criminal Record which has been filed with this Court. On my count, you have 166 prior convictions from 16 court appearances (allowing for the fact that in relation to some of these matters, you were re-sentenced on appeal). Your prior convictions date from 16 August 2000 and punctuate most years between then and May 2008, when you were sentenced to twelve months’ imprisonment in relation to six charges of burglary, seven charges of theft, including the theft of two motor vehicles, one charge of dishonestly assisting in the retention of stolen goods, and two charges of attempting to commit an indictable offence.
24 You have numerous prior convictions for burglary, theft, and handling or receiving stolen goods which are highly relevant to sentencing you in relation to these matters. Moreover, you have a prior conviction for reckless conduct endangering serious injury which was heard at this Court on 28th June 2005, whereby you were convicted and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, which was made concurrent with sentences imposed in respect of three charges of theft, one charge of burglary and one charge of handling or receiving stolen goods. The sentence was ordered to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order. I was advised by your counsel, Ms Greensill, that she understood this matter to concern you driving in a paddock, endangering your passenger. I requested more information in relation to this and have now obtained the sentencing remarks of His Honour, Judge Ross, in relation to that matter.
25 It is noteworthy that in his sentencing remarks, Judge Ross records that on 25th December 2005, you had burgled a factory and stolen a vacuum cleaner and that you stole two motor vehicles which were connected with burglaries- you were not presented with the burglaries; you pleaded guilty to the theft of a ‘valuable Porsche motor vehicle’ and a Ford utility, which were the products of those burglaries. The thefts in that matter have a familiar ring about them in light of your offending on this occasion, which is a cause for concern. For the sake of certainty, however, I do not sentence you for anything other than the offences to which you have pleaded guilty, and keeping in mind the Crown’s position in relation to the cars that you drove or in which you were a passenger, which were stolen by your co-offender.
26 Of even greater concern are the circumstances recorded by His Honour Judge Ross in relation to the charge of reckless conduct endangering serious injury, where he said this:
The police observations were that you drove the vehicle erratically and at high speeds on highways well in excess of designated speed limits. You caused interference to a number of drivers and there was an ever present risk of collisions whilst you were driving in this fashion….[1]
It is also apparent from these sentencing remarks that on this occasion, the Ford utility you were driving ended up in a ditch.
[1][2005] VCC 687 at [4]
27 On the further plea of the matters before me, the learned prosecutor rightly drew my attention to this aspect of your past offending, and also drew my attention to the fact that on the occasions of you being sentenced by His Honour, Judge Ross, and His Honour, Judge Chettle[2], similar matters to those put before me, were advanced by way of mitigation and in support of your prospects of rehabilitation. In that regard, the learned Prosecutor referred me to paragraphs 9 and 10 of His Honour Judge Ross’ sentence, which reads as follows:
[2][2006] VCC 1274
The first of the offending appears to have occurred in the year 2000, and it was said that that behaviour followed the breakdown of a relationship of which one child was born, and that coincided with a lapse into amphetamine use and for some years now you have continued to abuse amphetamine and counsel argues that that addiction contributed to your offending.
Counsel tendered the report of Pamela Matthews prepared on 20 June this year, Exhibit 1. I do not propose to go into detail in relation to that report. It refers to a number of troublesome personality traits and in particular a problem with anger control but there was nothing in that report which really indicates that principles of deterrence ought not play a role in this sentencing exercise.
28 On that occasion, His Honour Judge Ross found that there were ‘indications of rehabilitation’ and gave you the benefit of an intensive corrections order, albeit somewhat hesitantly. As the learned Prosecutor pointed out, you breached that intensive corrections order within a day of it being granted, and were re-sentenced by His Honour to 364 days immediate imprisonment on 27th April 2006.
29 His Honour Judge Chettle took the same report of Pamela Matthews into account, as I have already said, in sentencing you when you came before him on 28th September 2008 (see [2006] VCC 1274 at [10]). On that occasion, you had pleaded guilty to two counts of handling stolen goods, one count of possessing methylamphetamine and one count of being a prohibited person carrying an unregistered firearm, as well as some summary offences including a speeding charge where you had driven at 80 kilometres per hour in a 50km/hr zone. On that occasion, you had been pulled over by the police after they caught you speeding. Insofar as the handling stolen goods charges were concerned, you were found to be in possession of a car which had a number of parts from a car which had been stolen some months before.
30 Mr Fisher took me to paragraphs 14 and 15 of His Honour Judge Chettle’s sentence which reads as follows:
‘Ms Matthews was of the opinion that you suffer from a borderline personality disorder with an overlay of behavioural symptoms such as high levels of personal distress, impulsivity, sensation seeking, drug use, and a combination of those factors. Your past history is not without some hope. You successfully completed a combined custody and treatment order imposed in November 2004, and a report in relation to that order demonstrates that you satisfactorily completed that order and responded well to the support and structured disposition. In addition, it appears that prior to your incarceration in November 2005, you approached Narconon in an attempt to gain assistance with your drug addiction. Further, since being in custody, you have been drug free and have completed multiple courses…’
31 His Honour then went on to say:
‘You gave evidence upon your plea and described your time in prison. You indicated how you are now a mental stabiliser in the Marlborough Unit at Port Philip Prison and have held that position for some three and a half months. In that position you assist intellectually disabled prisoners, and as you said in evidence, you are attempting to get what you can out of being in prison. You seem to appreciate that drugs have been the scourge that had caused you much trouble, and that unless you cease using drugs, you will be in prison throughout your life’
32 It is that last sentence, to which I referred previously, in relation to your insight, of an association between drug taking and offending.
33 Of course, it is quite legitimate and consistent to put matters which go to your mental condition and your struggle with drugs; however, the overwhelming picture painted in your case insofar as drug use and reoffending is concerned is that ‘the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak’. Obviously, you are a model prisoner and one that makes life a good deal more bearable for some of your fellow inmates. You are obviously capable of behaving well when not affected by drugs, but, despite numerous chances and pronouncements of hope and encouragement and the unfailing support of your family, you continue to give in to the temptation of drug abuse and when you do, you commit offences; in this case, one of those offences, namely reckless conduct endangering serious injury, was all the more dangerous because you were drug affected.
34 You have received the benefit of a Community Based Order which you breached, and you have also received the benefit of two Intensive Corrections Orders (one of which you have breached), and a combined Custody and Treatment Order, amongst the various sentences imposed upon you along the way. However, neither periods of imprisonment nor dispositions obviously designed to address your difficulties with substance abuse, have served to rehabilitate you or deter you from further offending.
35 In relation to your prior convictions for offences concerning dishonesty, I was advised by Ms Greensill that these were committed to support your drug habit. I was advised that the burglaries were not on private premises but were committed on factories.
36 Ms Greensill said that you are thirty-two years old and as a child, you were diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder, for which you were prescribed Ritalin.
37 Your most supportive parents, decided to channel your energies into sport and you became a very good footballer, being a member of “Barry Breen’s Under 18s”. The St Kilda Football Club had expressed an interest in recruiting you.
38 You commenced an apprenticeship as a carpenter but did not complete this. However, you gained a sufficient knowledge to be able to work as a carpenter, which you have done from time to time.
39 I was told that you are essentially a model prisoner, and on the last three occasions of your incarceration, this has been your role, including your present time in custody. (And indeed this is referred to in the sentencing remarks of Judge Chettle). In that regard, a letter from Uniting Church Chaplain, Ross Forber-Minney, dated 29 April 2010 (Exhibit 7), together with a letter from GSL concerning a fellow inmate who performs the same role as you (Exhibit 6) were tendered. I take these matters into account in your favour, noting that whilst in prison, you have a capacity to be a positive influence upon others who are intellectually disabled. The letter from Ross Forber-Minney, the letter which you have written to me, as well as your plea of guilty, do indicate a level of disappointment in yourself and remorse for your actions. As I said in discussion with your counsel, it would appear that you have the capacity to be a responsible and contributing member of our community when you are not drug affected. Obviously, the overwhelming issue and challenge for you is to abstain from drug use and not re-offend.
40 Insofar as your prospects of rehabilitation are concerned, I must take into account your appalling criminal record, leading to similar offending on this occasion but I also must have regard to the evidence of your sister whereby she indicated that leading to the present offending, you had attended meetings at Narcotics Anonymous for a period of six months.
41 Ms Larmour, your sister, has some experience and expertise in relation to those afflicted by substance abuse. She gave evidence that you and she have a very close relationship and you have lived with her from time to time in the past. She gave evidence that you had a huge problem with addiction, and suffered from depression and anxiety. In this regard, I also take into account the report of Mr Bernard Healey, forensic psychologist, (Exhibit 1) dated 20 February 2010 and the Forensicare report which I ordered after hearing the first part of the plea in this matter. I will refer to each of those reports in due course.
42 Your sister said that in the six months that you had attended Narcotics Anonymous, you were showing some progress and that you did not miss one night of attendance. She confirmed that you had been off your medication as at the time of this offending and spoke of the death of your Aunt Terri and the illness of your grandfather, together with the trauma caused to you by the go‑kart accident. She gave evidence that you had taken yourself off medication in respect of your conditions of anxiety and depression because you had started a new job and these medications had an impact on your ability to think. You took the view that you were able to work more effectively without them.
43 Your sister also gave evidence that in recent times, you attempted to commit suicide by trying to slash your wrists – I understand that this occurred whilst you had been incarcerated and may have had something to do with the fact that you were receiving no medication and were withdrawing from amphetamine.
44 Your sister gave evidence that she had only given evidence in support of you on one previous occasion which was a couple of years ago and indicated that you are now prepared to face up to the challenges in your life and you were willing and able to re-enter the workforce. She was of the belief that you needed ongoing psychiatric treatment to deal with your depression and anxiety. She also indicated that at the time of this offending, you were living with your brother who was not very insightful. Whilst this might well be the case, you were certainly not a child at this time. You were well and truly an adult with an ability to make choices and decisions of your own. Even with the assistance of your sister and that offered at Narcotics Anonymous, these supports did not suffice to stop you from re-offending.
45 Your sister also gave evidence that in 2006, she took you to see a Dr Heffernan and you underwent some counselling in Frankston which deals with alcohol and drug addiction. She acknowledged that notwithstanding this, you relapsed, but said at this is quite common for people in your position.
46 She gave evidence that you had built up a relationship with your children, Montana, who is twelve years old, and Kyle, who is seven years old. She acknowledged that whilst you had sought assistance in the past in relation to your drug abuse, you had never done this as you had in February 2009 when you attended Narcotics Anonymous, saying that this was the best thing that you had done.
47 Ms Lamoure indicated that whilst she had offered support to you in the past, she had not offered you support to the extent that she now was. She was prepared again to have you live at her house and with appropriate psychiatric help and continued counselling, she had faith that you would not re-offend.
48 Ms Lamoure was a most articulate ambassador for your most supportive family, as I have already mentioned, many members of whom attended Court upon the hearing of your plea.
49 I have also considered the lengthy report of Mr Bernard Healey, who stated that you have average intellectual capacity and that personality testing was indicative of depression and anxiety although this was alleviated somewhat by prescribed anti-depressant medication over the past few years. He reports that you have exhibited ongoing positive changes in your attitude and refers to your role as a “stabiliser” supporting intellectually impaired prisoners and the fact that you have achieved enhanced prisoner status and that you desire to undergo training in youth work with a view to assisting others.
50 I also take into account your letter to me (Exhibit 2) where you gave a history of the difficulties you have faced and that upon release, you plan to live with your sister, Kim, and extend support that a responsible father can give to your two children, Montana and Kyle. I take the contents of that letter into account which reveals a level of insight into your offending and some positive aspects in relation to your present attitude. I have also taken into account the certificate from Moreland Hall in relation to your completion of an Intensive Drug Program, the report from Laurie Pearson dated 12 January 2009 in relation to the 12-Step Program and what was said by Ms Greensill in respect of wishing to obtain a Diploma in Advanced Business Management and your wish to become involved in youth work.
51 However, when weighing all of these matters up, I am afraid that I can only regard your prospects of rehabilitation as poor, although there is some glimmer of hope if you maintain your present attitude. The difficulty in your case, is that notwithstanding a good deal of intensive commitment to remaining drug-free, prior to this offending, you expressed your grief in relation to your aunt and grandfather and your suffering in relation to the go-kart incident, by mixing with your supposed friends and exposing yourself to drug taking and offending yet again. Not only did you commit the dishonesty offences, you engaged in highly dangerous conduct whilst being affected by amphetamine, and did so in the context of having numerous prior convictions. Whilst I am hopeful of you actually following through with what you have started on this occasion, your past and what you did on the occasion of this offending, notwithstanding some promising indications beforehand, lead me to conclude that your prospects of rehabilitation, as I have said, are poor. As you observed, yourself, before Judge Chettle, ‘unless you cease using drugs, you will be in prison throughout your life’. That is the very sad fact of it. It is to be hoped that upon your release from prison on this occasion, you do not let yourself down and you do not let your family down by any further drug abuse and reoffending. The principles of specific deterrence, general deterrence, denunciation and punishment must be given significant weight in your case, as well as giving appropriate weight to protecting the community from you.
52 In your letter to me, you asked that I do not “give up” on you and regard you as still being able to contribute to the community and have hope in rehabilitation. Whilst I certainly do have some hope in terms of your rehabilitation, I believe that it would be fanciful to regard these as even reasonable in the light of all of the matters to which I have just referred. But I will not impose a sentence that will deprive you of any hope, and trust that you will not give up on yourself as you do have a capacity to positively contribute to the community in the event that you can remain drug free.
53 I was informed by your counsel that you owe time to the Parole Board however, I was unable to find a record of this by way of confirmation, upon the original plea. I then asked the Prosecutor to provide a document from the Office of Corrections which indicates a prisoner’s position insofar as parole owed is concerned. This matter was further explored by the Prosecution and I was advised by email (in which the Defence were copied in) that you were released on parole on 19th February 2009 with an expiry date of 19th February 2010.
54 Accordingly, as these offences took place in August 2009, you offended whilst on parole which is a further circumstance of aggravation which I must take into account.
55 I was further advised that the Parole Board was awaiting the results of outstanding matters and that depending on that outcome, you may owe the Parole Board 12 months. As to this aspect, I cannot and do not take this into account.
56 Upon the initial hearing of this matter, I acceded to your counsel’s submission to obtain a Forensicare report, as Mr Healey’s report did not refer to any causal link between any mental condition that you were suffering and the offending in which you were involved. I have now received this report and have heard further submissions on the basis of it. The report dated 26th May 2010 was compiled by Dr. Kate Roberts. She found that ‘there was no evidence of a psychotic disorder or of any perceptual abnormalities.’ She further found that you have a clearly documented history of depression, and noted your instructions that as at the time of these offences you had taken yourself off your medication, and imbibed ecstasy, then amphetamine. However, there is no finding by her that your depression was linked to your offending. I am unable to find in these circumstances that the principles in
R v Verdins & Ors (2007) 16 VR 269, apply in such a way that would reduce your moral culpability or lead to moderation of the very important principles in this case of specific and general deterrence. Mr Fisher submitted as much, and despite the submissions of your Counsel that because you had this condition at the time which had gone unmedicated, then such a nexus ought be inferred, I am afraid I cannot accept that this was the case.
57 Dr Roberts indicated that your depressive disorder appears to have responded well to treatment for your condition and that, currently, there are no symptoms of depression or anxiety. In such circumstances I am unable to accept the submission of Ms Greensill that your time in custody will be harder than for those who do not have your mental condition. However, I do take into account the matters pertaining to your depressive disorder as reported by Mr Healey and Dr Roberts, in a general way.
58 I take into account in your favour your plea of guilty which occurred at a relatively early stage. This matter resolved at the committal hearing when you indicated that you were willing to plead guilty to the matters. Accordingly, a contested committal did not proceed and you have saved the witnesses the trauma and time of having to give evidence at committal and at trial. Moreover, you have saved the community the time and expense associated with such contested hearings. I also regard your plea of guilty as having an element of remorse associated with it.
59 It is accepted by your Counsel that only a term of immediate imprisonment is appropriate in your case. I invited the Prosecution to make submissions as to an appropriate sentencing range, and was advised that a head sentence of between 2 and a half years and 4 years with a non-parole period of between 18 months and 2 and a half years would be appropriate. Ms Greensill submitted that a period less than this ought be imposed and that the range was too high.
60 By consent, I make a Disposal Order in relation to items 1 through to 4 which are listed in the Schedule.
61 Having taken into account those matters in your favour, the aggravating features to which I have referred, and having accorded due weight to the principles of specific and general deterrence, your prospects of rehabilitation, the need to denounce your conduct and punish you for it, and in light of the seriousness of your offending on this occasion, and taking into account your remorse and other mitigating features, I sentence you as follows:
62 Please stand up, Mr Edwards.
63 In relation to Charge 1, the offence of burglary, you are convicted and sentenced to: 2 years 6 months imprisonment. This will be the base sentence.
64 In relation to Charge 2, the offence of handling stolen goods, being three motor vehicles, you are convicted and sentenced to: 2 years imprisonment.
65 In relation to Charge 3, the offence of theft, you are convicted and sentenced to: 1 year imprisonment.
66 In relation to Charge 4, the offence of theft, you are convicted and sentenced to: 6 months imprisonment.
67 In relation to Charge 5, the offence of burglary, you are convicted and sentenced to: 2 years imprisonment.
68 In relation to Charge 6, the offence of theft, you are convicted and sentenced to: 1 year imprisonment.
69 In relation to Charge 7, the offence of handling stolen goods, you are convicted and sentenced to: 1 month imprisonment.
70 In relation to Charge 8, the offence of reckless conduct endangering serious injury, you are convicted and sentenced to: 2 years 3 months imprisonment.
71 In relation to Charge 9, possession of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to: 1 month imprisonment.
72 I order periods of cumulation as follows: 3 months of the sentence imposed on charge 5, 3 months of the sentence imposed on charge 2 and 6 months of the sentence imposed on charge 8 are to be served cumulatively with each other and with the base sentence of Count 1, producing a total effective sentence of 3 years 6 months imprisonment. I further order that you are to serve 2 years 3 months imprisonment before becoming eligible to be released on parole.
73 I declare you have served 302 days by way of pre-sentence detention which will be reckoned as served in relation to this sentence.
74 Further, pursuant to s.28 Road Safety Act 1986, being satisfied that Charge 8 (reckless conduct endangering serious injury), and the charges pertaining to the theft of the motor vehicle and handling motor vehicles were committed in connection with the use of the motor vehicle, I order that your licence be cancelled and that you be disqualified from driving for a period of 2 years 3 months.
75 I indicate pursuant to s.6AAA Sentencing Act 1991, that if not for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 5 years with a non-parole period of 3 years 6 months.
76 Are there any other matters, counsel?
77 MR FISHER: No, Your Honour.
78 HER HONOUR: Ms Greensill, are there any matters?
79 MS GREENSILL: No, Your Honour.
80 HER HONOUR: Yes, you can remove the prisoner.
- - -
0