Director of Public Prosecutions v Kamil
[2022] VCC 981
•24 June 2022
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR-21-02413
CR-21-02414
CR-21-02416
CR-21-02417
CR-21-02419
CR-21-02420
CR-22-00071
CR-22-00072
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| MINA MEIKHAIL NOAH ZREIKA HUSSEIN KAMIL |
---
JUDGE: | Karapanagiotidis |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
DATE OF HEARING: | 5 May 2022 |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 24 June 2022 |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Kamil & Ors |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2022] VCC |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW - Sentencing
Catchwords: Plea of guilty – burglary – theft – handling stolen goods – possession of a drug a dependence – attempted burglary – negligently dealing with proceeds of crime – home invasion – COVID-19 pandemic – good prospects of rehabilitation – youth.
Legislation Cited: ss 5(2H), 6AAA, 18, 41(2) Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).
Cases Cited:Azzopardi v The Queen (2011) 35 VR 43; Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342; Bradshaw v The Queen [2017] VSCA 273; Director of Public Prosecutions v Shane O’Brien [2019] VSCA 254; DPP v Meyers [2014] VSCA 314; Hogarth v The Queen [2012] VSCA 302; Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; R v Mills [1998] 4 VR 235; R v Renzella [1999] VSCA 8; R v Verdins & Ors [2007] VSCA 102; Worboyes v R [2021] VSCA 169.
Sentence:HUSSEIN KAMIL - 516 days’ imprisonment with a 18 month Community Corrections Order.
MINA MEIKHAIL - 65 days’ imprisonment with a two year and eight month Community Corrections Order.
NOAH ZREIKA – 15 month Community Corrections Order.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr D. Porceddu | Director of Public Prosecutions |
For Accused Kamil | Mr. W Barker | Emma Turnbull Lawyers |
For Accused Meikhail | Ms. L Dubroja | Slades & Parsons Criminal Law |
For Accused Zreika | Mr N. Brown | Nelson Brown Legal |
HER HONOUR:
1Mina Meikhail, Noah Zreika and Hussein Kamil you have pleaded guilty to charges that relate to a number of residential burglaries and thefts. Also, in your case, Mr Meikhail, you have pleaded guilty to several burglaries committed on commercial premises. Mr Kamil additionally you have pleaded guilty to a charge of home invasion.
2A complete summary of your offending is contained in the Prosecution Opening, marked as Exhibit A on the plea. Adopting the chronology of the opening, your offending is summarised as follows.
Circumstances of the offending
22 December 2019
3On 22 December 2019 unknown offenders stole a silver Kia Cerrato, registration 1PU7HB.
2 January 2020
4On 2 January 2020 unknown offenders broke into a home and stole keys, which allowed them to steal a white Mercedes station wagon registration VRSD1.
5Videos later located on Zreika’s telephone show you, Mr Meikhail, along with others including Zreika, as passengers in the vehicle. I note Mr Zreika pleaded guilty to handling stolen goods in the Children’s Court on 3 February 2022.[1]
12 January 2020
[1] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 2 – theft of a motor vehicle.
6On 12 January 2020 at approximately 3.37am a group of offenders attended a Freshplus store at Roxburgh Park Shopping Centre in the stolen Kia Cerrato. The offenders smashed the glass window and entered the premise, stealing a large quantity of cartons of cigarettes. They returned and removed a small square safe; and all stolen items were loaded into the Kia. The cigarettes were worth $15,585.51 and the safe contained $42,151.39 cash. Videos were located on Zreika’s mobile that clearly implicate you, Mr Meikhail in the offending that you are pleading to.[2]
24 January 2020
[2] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 1 – handle stolen goods.
7On 24 January 2020 unknown offenders stole a Holden Commodore station wagon, registration 1PE6MX.
25 January 2020
8On 25 January 2020 at approximately 6.57am you Kamil and a co-offender attended residential premises on Horseshoe Crescent, Epping in the stolen Holden. You went to the front of the premises and kicked the front door off its hinges. You entered, ransacked the master bedroom and returned to the Holden, leaving the area without stealing anything.[3]
[3] Kamil only, indictment ending 706, Charges 1 & 2 – theft and burglary (theft of a motor vehicle and recklessly cause serious injury pled to on 25 February 2021).
9At approximately 7.50am that same day you Mr Kamil and the same co-offender attended a residence on Blossom Park Drive, Mill Park in the stolen Holden. You entered the rear of the property by jumping a fence and forcing open a sliding window to the laundry. Your co-offender gained entry and then opened the rear sliding door for you. Your co-offender took a kitchen knife from the rumpus room, and you walked upstairs. You stole various jewellery. You went to the master bedroom where the two victims, Rajesh and Anita Kumar, were present. Your co-offender demanded money from Rajesh while you Mr Kamil stood at the top of the staircase and watched. Rajesh grabbed hold of your co-accused’s wrists and a physical altercation took place. Your co-offender broke free, and you and he ran out of the house, returned to the Holden and left the scene.[4]
9 February 2020
[4] Kamil only, indictment ending 706, Charges 3 & 4 – home invasion and theft.
10On 9 February 2020 unknown offenders broke into a home in Doncaster, stealing items, including a Mazda CX7 registration WJE091.
12 February 2020
11On 12 February 2020 at 11.50am the victim Sentha Sivakumar was home at her address on Bitola Grove, Lalor with her young granddaughter when she heard a loud bang. She noticed her front door had been damaged and then observed an offender standing approximately five metres inside the front door in the hallway. She screamed and the offender left and was observed entering the stolen Mazda. The available CCTV footage shows three offenders in the car at the relevant time, and you Mr Meikhail were one of them.
12At 1.30pm on the same day offenders including you Mr Meikhail then attended a property on Rachelle Road, Keilor in the stolen Mazda. You approached the front door. One of you forced entry to the house by kicking the front door, causing damage to the door and the frame. You and a co-offender went through each of the bedrooms removing $1,100.00 in US currency and the keys to a red BMW Coupe, registration 63360H. You left the address via the garage in the stolen BMW.[5]
26 February 2020
[5] Meikhail only, indictment ending 852, Charges 1, 2, 3 & 4 – burglary (x2) and theft (x2).
13On 26 February 2020 at approximately 2.30pm, the three of you, that is you Meikhail , Zreika and Kamil attended Wellesley Drive, Taylors Lake. At the time the house was unattended. Entry was gained by kicking the front door causing damage to the door and its frame. The house alarm sounded, and the device was disabled. The master bedroom and other rooms were entered and rummaged through with a range of property stolen, as outlined in paragraph [50] of the prosecution opening, totalling a value of approximately $20,000.00.[6]
[6] Kamil, indictment ending 706, Charges 5 & 6 – theft and burglary.
Meikhail, indictment ending 852, Charges 5 & 6 – theft and burglary.
Zreika, indictment ending 681, Charges 1 & 2 – theft and burglary.
14On the same day, at approximately 2.42pm the three of you attended an address on Pintail Crescent, Taylors Lakes in the same stolen Mazda. Forceful entry was gained, causing some damage to the door and its frame. Bedrooms were rummaged through and a number of items, mainly jewellery, were taken as outlined in paragraph [54] of the prosecution opening, totalling over $32,000.00. The three of you were observed leaving the address with bags on your shoulders.[7]
[7] Kamil, indictment ending 706, Charges 7 & 8 – theft and burglary.
Meikhail, indictment ending 852, Charges 7 & 8 – theft and burglary.
Zreika, indictment ending 681, Charges 3 & 4 – theft and burglary.
15An hour or so later, at approximately 3.52pm the three of you attended an address on Pearl Drive in Craigieburn in the stolen Mazda. Forced entry was gained to the house, causing damage to the door and door frame. The master bedroom was entered, and items stolen included jewellery and an envelope containing jewellery belonging to the victim.[8]
[8] Kamil, indictment ending 706, Charges 9 & 10 – theft and burglary.
Meikhail, indictment ending 852, Charges 9 & 10 – theft and burglary.
Zreika, indictment ending 681, Charges 5 & 6 – theft and burglary.
16Less than 20 minutes later, at 4.10pm, the three of you attended an address on Biltmore Crescent, Roxburgh Park. The victim, Navya Yadagira, was at the rear of her house when she heard loud bangs. She then saw you inside of her house. She observed damage to her front door and started screaming. You ran out the front door, returning to the stolen Mazda and left at a fast rate of speed.[9]
[9] Kamil, indictment ending 706, Charge 11 – burglary.
Meikhail, indictment ending 852, Charge 11 – burglary.
Zreika, indictment ending 681, Charge 7 – burglary.
17At approximately 4.20pm the same day police were patrolling in the vicinity of the burglary at the address on Biltmore Crescent, Roxburgh Park. They attended nearby at Lakeside Drive Reserve Carpark where thy observed a silver Holden Astra sedan, with fraudulent registration plates, parked. Approaching the vehicle, they could smell cannabis. They observed a person outside of the vehicle, who has subsequently been dealt with for a range of matters in the Children’s Court, and the three of you. On searching the vehicle, they located a number of items, as particularised in the relevant charge. They also located inside Mr Meikhail’s pocket the stolen keys to the Mazda CX7. Some of the stolen property from Pintail Crescent address was also located and ultimately returned to the rightful owner.[10]
[10] Kamil, indictment ending 706, Charge 12 – handling stolen goods.
Meikhail, indictment ending 852, Charge 12 – handling stolen goods.
Zreika, indictment ending 681, Charge 9 – handling stolen goods.
18During the search of the car small quantities of cannabis was also located, along with cocaine. This is the basis for your charges Mr Zreika.[11]
[11] Zreika only, indictment ending 681, Charges 9 & 10 – possession of a drug of dependence (x2).
19You were all arrested and later interviewed by the police.
20The remaining charges relate only to you Mr Meikhail, unless I state otherwise.
13 March 2020
21On 13 March 2020 at 12.32pm unknown offenders attended an address on Daylesford Terrace, Caroline Springs in the stolen Mazda. The unknown offenders forced entry into the home and stole items including Sri Lankan currency. On 22 March 2020 you assisted in the handling of the currency, in that you used your phone to search the internet for the value of Indian currency.[12]
17 March 2020
[12] Meikhail only, indictment ending 852, Charge 13 – handling stolen goods.
22On 17 March 2020 at 1.10pm unknown offenders attended an address on Polar Boulevard, Tarneit, forced entry into the home and during the incident also stole a Toyota Kluger, registration plates 1LM1PN.
23On 19 March 2020 at 2.00am you, Mr Meikhail, and unknown co-offenders attended TSG Bundoora situated at the Uni Hill complex in the stolen Kluger, now bearing incorrect plates WTI117. You and other co-offenders smashed through the front glass doors and attempted to force entry to the cigarette safes behind the counter. You ransacked the store but left empty handed. You returned to the Kluger, and police attempted to intercept the vehicle and a brief police pursuit ensued.[13]
[13] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 3 – burglary.
24On 21 March 2020 at approximately 2.00pm you and unknown co-offenders attended an address on Old Warrandyte Road, Ringwood North while it was unattended. You forced entry and stole a number of items, as outlined in paragraph [103] of the prosecution opening and estimated to total $160,000.00.[14]
[14] Meikhail only, indictment ending 852, Charges 14 & 15 – theft and burglary.
25On 25 March 2020 at 1.08am you and other co-offenders attended Airport West Westfield Shopping Centre in the stolen Kluger. You forced entry into the building and from there forced the plastic bi-fold doors to the TSG. You forced the cigarette cabinets open, stealing a large quantity of cigarettes and throwing them into a large sheet, which was carried back to the Kluger before it drove away.[15]
[15] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charges 4 & 5 – theft and burglary.
26On 30 March 2020 investigators commenced surveillance on your home address on Villawood Avenue, Roxburgh Park and observed a number of vehicles, including stolen ones, arrived and depart your address. You were observed in the stolen Mazda 3.[16]
[16] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 6 – theft.
27On 31 March 2020 at 12.24am you and unknown co-offenders attended the Brunswick IGA. You smashed through the front glass windows using a sledgehammer and crow bars. You were observed and interrupted by a witness and returned to the Mazda 3 and fled at a fast rate of speed.[17]
[17] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 7 – burglary.
28A short time later at 12.46am you attended the TSG in Oak Park with co-offenders. You and your co-offenders approached the front door and used the sledgehammer in an attempt to gain entry. The damage activated the alarm and ultimately you fled in the Mazda 3.[18]
[18] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 8 – attempted burglary.
Investigation
29On 31 March 2020 investigators arrested you Kamil in Roxburgh Park. Shortly after, police arrested you Meikhail at your home address where you were located in a side garage with Zreika, who was also arrested. During the search police located the key to the Mazda 3 in Meikhail’s pocket. A search warrant was executed and $1500.00 in $100 notes was seized and further cash, totalling $1,578.00.[19] A stolen watch was also located.[20] A small amount of cannabis was also located.[21]
[19] Meikhail only, indictment ending 863, Charge 9 – negligently dealing with proceeds of crime.
[20] Meikhail only, indictment ending 852, Charge 16 – handling stolen goods.
[21] Meikhail only, indictment ending 852, Charge 17 – possession of a drug of dependence.
30You were all arrested and interviewed.
Nature and gravity of the offending
31I’ll first deal with the offending that you all share in common, which occurred on 26 February 2020. There are four burglaries and three thefts.
32The first was on a Wellesley Drive address at approximately 2.30pm where you entered the home by causing damage to the front door and stole jewellery, watches and other items to the estimated value of approximately $20,000.00.
33The second burglary on Pintail Crescent was approximately ten minutes later where again entry was gained by using physical force causing damage and stole items of high estimated value.
34The third burglary was committed a bit over an hour later on Pearl Drive where entry was again gained by kicking the front door, causing damage, and jewellery and other items were stolen.
35Approximately 20 minutes later you attended at an address on Biltmore Crescent where you left without taking anything. The victim heard some loud bangs; she saw one of you in her home and started to scream. She observed the remaining two of you exit the master bedroom and run out the door.
36You are all also pleading to one charge of handle stolen goods on that day, arising from the police locating you in the vicinity of the last burglary, searching your car and locating stolen property, as outlined in the summary and the charge. Mr Zreika on this day you were also charged with possessing drugs in small quantities.
37Burglaries are serious offences, as reflected in the maximum sentences. I regard your offending as serious. You invaded people’s homes and stole their personal possessions. On at least two occasions, the property stolen included property of high monetary value. At the last burglary, the occupant heard you and screamed when she saw you in her home. Although I don’t have a Victim Impact Statement from her, one can readily appreciate how such a confrontation would be frightening. I take into account that the burglaries all occurred during the one day and within a relatively confined period of approximately 40 minutes. Beyond the repeated nature of the offending, I accept that there is little else to suggest the offending involved preparation or premeditation.
38Mr Meikhail, in addition to the common charges, you face a further three residential burglary and associated thefts and dishonesty charges, as I’ve already outlined. Two burglaries occurred on 12 February 2020. In relation to Charge 1, I note that the victim was home with her young granddaughter when she heard a loud bang and saw an offender in her home. The last burglary occurred on 21 March 2020 where the estimated value of items taken was significant.
39Mr Meikhail you were also involved in a number of commercial burglaries and other associated dishonesty offending, the subject of indictment L10805863. There are a total of three burglaries and one attempted burglary. As was conceded on your behalf, the commercial burglaries are serious. They were committed in company, they were organised, planned, involved the use of weapons or tools to force entry and the quantum of property stolen was of a moderate to high value. Also, from start to end your offending period spans some eleven weeks, from 12 January 2020 until your ultimate arrest on 31 March 2020. I also note that you were questioned by the police on 26 February 2020 with your other co-accused and yet you continued to offend after this period.
40It was generally put on your behalf that at the time of the offending you were disconnected from your family. You had stopped working, increased your drug use and had disengaged from positive pursuits. Notably, your treating psychologist Ms Christine Harding in her report of 11 March 2022 comments on the change in your engagement and behaviours during this period of time.
41Mr Zreika your offending is largely confined to the charges that I have referred to, that occurred on 26 February 2020. It was put on your behalf that you had only just turned 18 years of age at the time of your offending. You found yourself unemployed at the start of the year and your drug use increased. You became less involved with your family and home life and more involved with drug using peers.
42Mr Kamil, beyond the common charges that I have referred to, you also face several charges relating to the 25 January 2020 the most significant being Charge 3 on the indictment, that of home invasion.
43Home invasion is an inherently serious offence, as reflected by its maximum penalty. In your case, the home invasion is put on the basis that you entered as a trespasser with intent to steal in company and while you were present in the home, both Mr and Mrs Kumar were also present. While there was no dispute that this charge is a serious one, I accept that your offending does not carry with it some of the aggravating features seen in such cases as Hogarth[22], where multiple offenders carrying weapons enter a home with the object of confronting or assaulting those inside. It is not suggested that you were carrying a knife or that you involved yourself in making any direct threats or in the altercation that unfolded. Nevertheless, as the Court of Appeal has made clear this is serious offending, calling for both general and specific deterrence. It is simply unacceptable for a person to feel unsafe in their home and to be confronted by strangers in this manner[23].
[22]Hogarth v The Queen [2012] VSCA 302.
[23] Director of Public Prosecutions v Shane O’Brien [2019] VSCA 254; Hogarth v The Queen [2012] VSCA 302; DPP v Meyers [2014] VSCA 314.
44Home invasion is a Category 2 offence, and absent proof of one of the matters set out in s 5(2H) of the Sentencing Act1991 (Vic), a Court must impose a custodial disposition as contained in Part 2 of Division 3, and not in combination with a Community Corrections Order (“CCO”). The Court was not called upon to resolve this issue given in your case it is of little practical consequence as to whether the exception applies. In light of the agreed position of the parties, along with my own assessment that regardless of the provision’s possible application, a term of imprisonment is called for on the charge, I will not consider this further. The factors that may have been called upon in support of any such exemptions are matters that I have taken into account in sentencing you.
45The Court received a Victim Impact Statement from Mr Kumar and it speaks eloquently and powerfully of the traumatic effect your offending has had on both him and his wife. He states: ‘our life of independence, freedom and security has been totally destroyed by the events of that morning. We are now feeling very vulnerable and violated by the entry of two strangers entering our home, our sanctuary’. He outlines how your offending has had a pervasive and ongoing impact. They have had to see a counsellor. It has affected their relationships with family and friends. It has impacted on their work. It has caused them to reconsider their plan for an early retirement because they feel safer at work then they do in their own home.
46Mr Kamil as for your circumstances at the time, you were also using drugs and gambling. You also owed money to people for a car which caused you fear as you had been assaulted on several occasions because of the debt.
Procedural history
47As outlined in the prosecution opening you were all arrested and initially remanded in custody on 31 March 2020.
48You Mr Meikhail were interviewed and denied the offending. You were remanded and then on 4 June 2020, after some 65 days on remand, you were released on bail, with conditions.
49Mr Zreika you were also interviewed and made denials. You were released the following day, with conditions, including that you not associate with any of your co-accused. On 21 April 2020 you were recorded speaking to Meikhail during an Arunta call, and that is the subject of summary charge, breach of bail condition. On 11 May 2020 you were arrested for contravention of bail and remanded in custody. As a result of a conversation police had with you, they returned the Holden Astra to its owner, your mother, Rana Kassab on the 18 May 2020. On 23 September 2020 you were released on bail. You have a total of 136 days of pre-sentence detention.
50Mr Kamil you were interviewed and made a no comment interview. You were remanded in custody and then have had several periods on bail and remand. This includes most recently on 17 June 2022 when your bail on this matter was revoked. There was some disagreement between the parties as to your precise amount of pre-sentence detention but it is at least in the order of some 540 days. Your Counsel also relied upon a previous period you had served in custody as relevant Renzella[24] time.
[24]R v Renzella [1999] VSCA 85.
Plea of guilty & remorse
51Your cases proceeded to a committal hearing commencing on 11 November 2021 and then later, in this Court, as a case conference. The testing and discussion at both these hearings clearly assisted parties to arrive at an appropriate agreement. Your matters resolved to a substantially reduced indictment. In the circumstances, in relation to each of you, I regard your plea as an early one and it entitles you to a significant discount.
52Also, I accept that your plea is of real and significant utilitarian value to the Court as it is entered during the COVID-19 health crisis and by reason of this it will attract a more pronounced amelioration of sentence than at other times[25].
[25]Worboyes v R [2021] VSCA 169.
53I also accept, in each of your cases, that your plea of guilty demonstrates remorse. Additionally, in your case Mr Meikhail I find remorse is indicated in the significant and sustained efforts you have made to your rehabilitation, your expressions of remorse to others and as outlined in your letter to the Court, where you express empathy for your victims and shame for your conduct.
54In your case Mr Zreika I also consider that remorse is reflected in the efforts you have made while on bail and your expressions of remorse. In your letter to the Court you indicate that you have reflected on your past actions and that you are truly sorry and you have ‘matured a lot’.
Personal circumstances
MEIKHAIL
55Mr Meikhail you were born in October 2001 in Victoria and are the middle child of three siblings.
56Your parents were born in Egypt. They both worked as teachers in a university and married in 1991. Your older sister was born the following year in Egypt. In 1996 your family moved to Christchurch, New Zealand for a better life. Your father struggled to find permanent work there so after several years you relocated to Australia. Your father came first, and the rest of the family followed, including your mother who was pregnant with you at the time. You were born in Melbourne and your younger brother was born in January 2003.
57You describe a happy childhood and being close with your family and enjoying trips to Egypt. Your sister is a midwife. She is married and has a young child and remains living close by in Roxburgh Park. Your family lived in Glenroy until 2012 and then purchased a home in Roxburgh Park. In November 2017 your father suffered a heart attack and was hospitalised. Since this time he’s been unable to return to work due to poor health.
58You commenced High School at Penola Catholic College in 2014 and at first enjoyed school and engaged well.
59In 2015 you started using cannabis. In July 2017 your drug use increased to cocaine. You used both of these substances up until your time you were remanded for these offences. Since March 2020 you have not used any illicit substances.
60Prior to the commencement of Year 9 your family home was completely destroyed in a house fire. You accidentally caused the fire by leaving a portable heater on in a bedroom. This incident, and its consequences, caused you considerable trauma and guilt. At the time you were at an important period of your development. You were in Year 9 at school and had been engaging well and also participating in sports. After the fire, your family lived with your sister for a period while the house was being rebuilt. You started to detach from your family, increased your substance use and association with anti-social peers. While living with your sister during this period, her home was also burgled, which caused you further angst. You moved schools, transferring to Roxburgh Park in Year 9. You attended for part of Year 10 before leaving school altogether in 2017.
61You then enrolled in Kangan TAFE in a Certificate 2 pre-apprenticeship course of plumbing however you only attended one week, as you struggled to adapt to the learning environment. You attempted to re-engage with high school again for part of 2017, but attended infrequently.
62In May 2018 you commenced a program with Synergy Autorepairs, completing the program including a placement. In December 2018 you commenced an apprenticeship though didn’t complete it. In May 2019 you commenced working full time at a panel beating shop.
63Mr Meikhail, you have a relevant prior criminal history. You apparently experienced your first period on youth remand in 2017. On 8 February 2018 you were dealt with for a consolidation of matters in the Children’s Court, including 12 counts of burglary and a number of other dishonesty related matters. You were placed on a without conviction, youth supervision order. On 26 February 2019 you were before the Courts for breaching the order and for new offending, including dangerous driving while pursued by police. Your order was confirmed and your licence was cancelled and disqualified. In July 2019 you were last before the Children’s Court for a consolidation of matters including resist police officer, commit indictable offence on bail and various driving offences. You were placed on a youth supervision order for a period of 12 months to 29 July 2020, without conviction. The current offending occurred while you were on this order.
64The Court was told that in connection with these sentences you had spent significant periods on deferral under the supervision of youth justice. Your pattern was to engage well for the first few months and then on encountering some type of personal stress or disappointment you’d quickly relapse into significant drug use and consequent offending.
ZREIKA
65Mr Zreika, you were born in February 2002 and grew up in the northern suburbs of Melbourne where you continue to live with your mother and grandmother. You also live with your two siblings. You enjoy a close relationship with your family.
66You do not have a relationship with your father, who left the family when you were eight years of age. You witnessed and were exposed to family violence by your father upon your mother.
67You attended Hume Central Secondary College until Year 10, after which you commenced and completed an electrical pre-apprenticeship course at TAFE.
68You went onto work for a heating and cooling company before working in a casual position until January 2020 with a concentrating company. From January 2020 you were unemployed.
69You commenced using cannabis at the age of 16. Your drug use increased significantly at the start of 2020 when you became unemployed and in the lead up to this offending. You also started using other drugs like cocaine. It’s within the context of this drug use that your offending occurred.
70You have no prior criminal history. I note the subsequent breach of bail charge, already referred to, for which you were sentenced to a without conviction adjourned undertaking. Also, on 3 February 2022 you appeared in the Children’s Court for handling stolen goods and theft of a motor vehicle charges that arose from the present investigation. You were sentenced to a good behaviour bond, without conviction.
KAMIL
71Mr Kamil, you were born in March 2001. You are of Turkish and Spanish background. You spent most of your childhood in Meadow Heights with your parents and grandparents. Your mother died from breast cancer when you were only 12 years of age, and your grandparents took care of you and your siblings.
72You have two brothers, aged 22 and 18, and one sister, aged 16. You have a relatively good relationship with your siblings. Your sister provided a letter to the Court where she very ably describes you and the affection she has for you. It seems to her that you have been in jail more than you’ve been out of it.
73Following your mother’s death, your father moved to the Gold Coast. Her death had a significant impact on you all, and you in particular struggled. You kept in contact with your father over the telephone, but this was difficult, and you felt abandoned by him. When you were around 17 years of age you lived with your father in the Gold Coast. I was told that you’ve lived with him twice and that you did relatively well during those times. In 2017 you transferred the supervision order that you were on to Queensland, and you completed a building and construction traineeship working on critical infrastructure projects around the Gold Coast associated with the Commonwealth Games. Your father refers to this in his letter and notes that you were always on time to work and trade school and that he was receiving positive reports about you.
74It’s upon moving back to Victoria that your criminal history commenced, in the context of using drugs and associating with negative peer groups. After being remanded and sentenced to adult gaol in late 2019, when you were only 18, you apparently met offenders, much older than you, and continued a friendship or association with them upon your release. Typically they’d pick you up and ask you to be a look out for their own criminal activities. You spent a lot of time with them and in that context you began using methamphetamine.
75In terms of schooling, you attended Craigieburn Secondary College and dropped out in Year 9. You worked as an electrician for three months and with a carpenter for four months.
76When you were in Grade 5 you were diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (“ADHD”). You were prescribed Ritalin that you continued to take on and off until you were remanded. I note you also suffer from asthma. You attended four or five counselling sessions with Headspace but disengaged.
77You have struggled with illicit substances from a young age. You started using cannabis at age 14 and did so heavily until you were 18. From the age of 16 you used cocaine daily. From the age of 18, as I’ve already indicated, you started using methamphetamine. You continued using it daily for the past 18 months. You also used prescription medications including Xanax twice weekly.
78You started gambling from around the age of 18 and would play in-person at the pokies and online on Sports Bet. You have ended up losing most of your money through gambling.
79As for your prior criminal history, in May 2017 you were before the Children’s Court and placed on a without conviction probation order for assault matters. On 5 March 2019 you were sentenced to a with conviction youth supervision order for a consolidation of matters, including three burglaries and four thefts of a motor vehicle. On 4 December 2019 you appeared in the Magistrates’ Court and were sentenced to a period of 102 days in custody for dishonesty matters and breach bail, with the term reckoned as served.
Mitigatory factors
80On behalf of each of you, your respective Counsel relied upon a number of mitigatory factors.
Youth
81You are all young men. Mr Kamil you turned 21 a couple of months ago and Mr Meikhail and Mr Zreika you are still 20. Mr Zreika at the time of the offending you had only just turned 18 years of age.
82There are well established principles that therefore apply in your case, including as follows:
a)The youth of an offender should be a primary consideration for a sentencing court where that matter properly arises.[26]
b)Young offenders are immature, and may not fully appreciate the nature, seriousness and consequences of their criminal conduct.
c)Courts recognise the increased potential for young offenders to be rehabilitated; rehabilitation of young offenders is one of the great objectives of the criminal law and in the public interest; and
d)Incarceration is more likely to impair rather than enhance a young offenders prospects of rehabilitation.[27] While in prison a youthful offender is likely to be exposed to corrupting influences which may entrench in that young person criminal behaviour.
[26] R v Mills [1998] 4 VR 235.
[27]Azzopardi v The Queen (2011) 35 VR 43, [34].
83While I recognise that the offending here is serious, in all the circumstances, I consider that significant weight should attach to your youth. The sentencing objectives of deterrence, denunciation, just punishment and protection of the community remain relevant. In your case, in particular, Mr Meikhail, they ought to attract some additional prominence with some reduction to the weight of your youth given the grave and persistent nature of your offending.[28]
[28] Ibid.
Health
84Mr Meikhail your Counsel did not submit that any of the Verdins[29] were enlivened but nevertheless referred to your various mental health conditions as relevant to your circumstances. In her report, Ms Christine Harding states that you presented at initial sessions with undiagnosed symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, severe anxiety and polysubstance misuse. Subsequent screening revealed that you consistently presented with mood instability, typically with elevated scores for both Anxiety and Depression and sleep difficulties. The MHARS report the Court ordered of 21 March 2022 noted your documented history of trauma, dysregulation and self-esteem issues and polysubstance misuse. You presented as having a mild mental health problem or difficulty but as otherwise relatively stable. It was considered that you would benefit from psychological assistance to focus on achieving your pro-social life goals, which would in turn improve your self-esteem and personal assertiveness skills. I take these matters into account generally in sentencing you.
[29] R v Verdins & Ors [2007] VSCA 102.
85In your case Mr Kamil, Ms Gina Cidoni in her report of 15 March 2022 (Exhibit HK 2) concluded that you meet the diagnostic criteria for the following psychological conditions –
a) ADHA;
b) Generalised Anxiety Disorder (“GAD”);
c) Major Depressive Disorder with prolonged grief (“MDD”);
d) Substance Use Disorder; and
e) Gambling Disorder.
86She opined that your symptoms cause a sense of feeling easily overwhelmed, with difficulties modulating behaviours, variable energy and concentration, inability to relax, fluctuating moods, restlessness, reduced sleep and appetite, impulsivity, hopelessness and loss of self-esteem. Ms Cidoni opines that your offending was committed under the influence of stimulant drugs and that your underlying mental illness also played a significant role, with impulsivity from your ADHD, anxiety, depression and inherent poor reasoning skills present.
87Ms Cidoni also concluded in her first report that your cognitive abilities were in the borderline to extremely low range. She recommended further in-person cognitive assessment to determine whether your IQ fell within the range of intellectual disability. On 2 May 2022, the Court received a Statement of Intellectual Disability and later a Disability Overview Report and Justice Plan. Your cognitive ability was estimated to fall within the extremely low range and you were assessed as having unmet disability means, particularly in the areas of community access and independent living. While there’s no clear or direct evidence as to the manner in which your intellectual disability may have impacted on your offending, it’s clearly a relevant matter in sentencing you.[30] In her last report, Ms Cidoni states the following: ‘[you] have slow neurodevelopmental maturity, unreliable judgment, vulnerability to peer influence, and [you are] more likely to think in terms of short-term consequences, where [your] ability to fully understand is hindered’.
[30]Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39.
88Ms Cidoni also opines that your cognitive limitations, youth and mental illness are relevant to your ability to manage long term in a prison environment. On the evidence, I consider that your psychological conditions, and cognitive limitations, means that prison weighs more heavily on you than a person in ‘normal health’ and therefore enlivens limb five of Verdins.
Conditions in custody
89In all your cases, I have also had regard to the additional burden of imprisonment during the pandemic and the well-known reduction in services and increase in restrictions.
90In your case Mr Meikhail, it was submitted that during your remand period, which was your first experience of adult custody, you were not able to receive personal visits nor were you able to engage in recreational or rehabilitative activities because of the strict social distancing measures in place.
91In your case Mr Zreika, it was submitted that your period on remand represented your first time in custody. It was very hard; you were vulnerable due to your young age and the conditions were more restrictive and it has operated as a significant personal deterrent.
92In your case Mr Kamil, your counsel relied upon the ongoing impact of COVID-19 during your very substantial period on remand. It was submitted that you have suffered all the conditions in custody bought about by COVID-19, including lockdowns, suspensions of visits, and severely reduced time out of your cell.
Delay
93There has been some delay encountered in the resolution of this matter, which I take into account. Mr Meikhail I was told that you were the subject, initially at least, to some very stringent bail conditions including: a residential address; curfew; no driving; not to have more than one phone and to provide the number of the informant; no access to social media; and not attend various areas include Roxburgh Park Village and Airport West. Some of these conditions were later relaxed to take account of the further challenges or restrictions caused by COVID-19.
94In respect of all of you, I take into account the delay in this matter finalising; the matter has been hanging over your head and also particularly in the cases for both Mr Meikhail and Mr Zreika the delay has enabled you to put to this Court evidence of reformation. In your case Mr Kamil your Counsel submits that the delay and associated long period on remand has deprived you of the opportunity to have been dealt with by way of youth detention, where rehabilitation and deterrence could have been better achieved.
Prospects of rehabilitation
MEKHAIL
95In your case Mr Meikhail, as I indicated at the plea hearing, there is impressive evidence as to your rehabilitation and the sustained efforts you have made. I accept that since release your circumstances have changed significantly.
96You have not used any illicit drugs since your remand in March 2020.
97You successfully completed drug counselling in November 2020 through the Reach Out Program, Anglicare, organised through Youth Justice. Llewellyn Davey, youth drug and alcohol worker with Anglicare states that you ‘continued to display [your] motivation and intention to remain abstinent from illicit substances and to make positive and pro-social life choices’.
98You have engaged in all appointments with Youth Justice. The progress report of 21 June 2022 indicates that since being granted bail in June 2020 you have attended 111 ot 113 Youth Justice appointments to date. The Court has received ongoing and updated progress reports all indicating that you maintain positive engagement in supervision and have undertaken all programs. In a letter of 25 July 2020, James Nixon, from the Jesuit Social Services described you as ‘quite simply, … a delight to work alongside’ because of your attitude and motivation.
99You have continued to engage enthusiastically and honestly with your psychologist, Ms Harding. The Court has the benefit of receiving a report from a psychologist who has seen you since 1 March 2019, that is prior to your offending. She states that initially your attendance and engagement in sessions was exemplary however once your substance use increased, estrangement from family escalated and your engagement with anti-social peers intensified. You started to engage in sessions superficially, often becoming defensive when challenged. Prior to your offending, you presented as paranoid and distrustful. She reports that since your remand in adult custody for these offences you have reflected meaningfully on your offending and past circumstances. You have engaged enthusiastically in sessions, and you’ve also worked diligently with psychoeducational worksheets provided in between sessions. You are committed to developing and maintaining strategies to assist mitigate the risk of future offending behaviours. More recently, Ms Harding has confirmed that you have developed great skills and worked really well to manage risk and refrain from offending behaviours.
100When you were released, you were bailed to reside with your sister. Your sister, Mr Meikhail, has provided an insightful letter to the Court. When you lived with her you followed the rules she set; you had long discussions about the choices you had made in the past; you promised her that you would do your best to turn your life around; and you have not disappointed her. She speaks of the assistance you have given your five-year-old nephew and how she has watched you change and grow into the man that she knows you’re capable of being.
101Due to the breakdown in family relationships, Youth Justice referred you and your family for family counselling to help rebuild the relationships. The family successfully engaged in all sessions. During the second lockdown in 2020 your bail was varied to reside at your parents’ home. I received a letter from Mr James Tupai of Anglicare Victoria. You and your family attended nine sessions and he observed you to be motivated to make positive changes. Your mother’s letter also refers to the changes you have made in your life. You spend more time with your family. You help around the house. She has received positive progress reports that make her proud. You have shown motivation; applied for the army; applied and obtained work; and have demonstrated over the last two years your determination to change.
102You were referred back to Synergy Autorepairs by Youth Justice and engaged in a Certificate II in automotive studies through Kangan TAFE. You successfully completed the course in October 2020.
103You then commenced an application with the Australia Defence Force who informed you that you require a Year 10 equivalent. You enrolled and completed your certificate II in General Education in December 2021. Mr Mathew Rolfe was your teacher at the time and has provided a letter dated 11 March 2022. He describes you as a diligent and motivated student and he was impressed with the level of motivation and perseverance you showed through the course. You are now exploring further study options.
104You commenced employment as a panel beater in December 2020 with the intention of gaining an apprenticeship. This did not eventuate, so you resigned in March 2021. Between April and November 2021 you were employed as an apprentice panel beater though employment stopped for a combination of reasons, including that you had taken some sick days. You have recently commenced causal employment at an auto repair shop. In March 2022 you successfully obtained your probationary licence.
105As your Counsel submitted at your plea hearing, what really speaks of the significant change you’ve made is that when things get difficult, such as when you lost your job, you have not resumed your past pattern. You have instead remained motivated and focused on your ultimate objective, which is to never return to prison.
106What also bodes very well in your favour, is that you have gone beyond the requirements set on your bail. You have engaged voluntarily in other programs, and you have sourced your own courses and your own education. I agree with your Counsel’s submissions that, notwithstanding your prior criminal history, your rehabilitative prospects are very good.
ZREIKA
107Since your release by the Supreme Court on bail on 23 September 2020 you have been on stringent conditions including a curfew, Youth Justice compliance and the requirement to provide urinalysis screens on a fortnightly basis.
108You have engaged very well with Youth Justice, according to the latest progress report of 21 June 2022 and the previous reports provided to the Court. You have presented as forthcoming during discussions and motivated. Although in January 2021 there was a positive urine screen confirming the use of cocaine, since that time, and currently, you do not present with any substance use or mental health use concerns.
109It was submitted that based on the material you present with excellent prospects of rehabilitation. You are of previous good character. You are currently employed, and you are working for EWS Roofing and Plumbing. I received a letter from your employer Mr Mohammad Noori. He describes you as motivated and dedicated; a hard worker, family orientated and as someone who is defiantly working towards his future. Once you are closer to being fully qualified you intend to branch off into your own business.
110Your mother also provided a letter to the Court; she clearly loves and supports you and is proud of the man you are becoming. You were initially living with your grandmother and brother but have since moved back living with your sister and siblings. Youth Justice consider that your family unit presents as a protective factor for you and appears to be encouraging you to live a life free from criminal activity.
111Your own letter to the Court indicates that you have taken this all very seriously and have learnt from your mistakes. You state, ‘I have been working, I can see a new path I want to go down and work towards all the goals I have set out, which include finishing my apprenticeship, helping my family and moving on to hopefully have a bright future’.
112I accept that you present with very strong prospects of rehabilitation and you have a promising future ahead of you.
KAMIL
113On your behalf it was submitted that while there are some prospects of rehabilitation your prospects are guarded. You do have a supportive family, though there are challenges as your grandparents are unwell. Your ultimate goal is to move back with all of your siblings to live with your father in Queensland, where you have previously done well. You have had no prior contact with Disability Services but now that your intellectual disability has been diagnosed you are eligible for services. You have unmet special needs and require assistance. I note that since the request for services was made by the Court your engagement with Disability Justice has been limited and you’ve been difficult to contact. Disability Services consider that a contributing factor for this might be your deficits in expressive and receptive language, your impaired verbal comprehension and being unfamiliar with their services.
114You recently reoffended which has led to your return to custody. You have been charged with breaching bail and some dishonesty offences that are next listed in the Magistrates’ Court in July. This is obviously a real concern and I agree with Mr Porceddu that your prospects of rehabilitation are very guarded. However, you are only still a young man and I consider that your prospects will be significantly enhanced with supports and the implementation of the recommendations made in the Justice Plan.
Other co-accused
115As discussed at the plea hearing, there were other co-accused for some of your charges. One of the co-accused was sentenced in the Children’s Court on a consolidation of matters to a youth supervision order. He was sentenced on a number of charges in common with the three of you. I have had regard to his sentence but consider that given the very different sentencing regime of the Children’s Court, parity as between the co-accused sentenced in the Children’s Court has little role to play in sentencing you.
116In relation to co-accused Mr Toma he was sentenced by this Court in February 2021 to an aggregate term of four years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and three months’ imprisonment. He pleaded guilty to 56 offences, representing 17 incidents. While I have had regard to his sentence, I consider that there are important differences in his charges and personal circumstances that warrant a disparate sentence. I also note that at the time of his sentence, he was on remand and did not have the compelling material as to rehabilitation that both you Mr Meikhail and Mr Zreika can call upon in your pleas.
117As between the three of you, the sentences I will impose will also reflect the differences in your personal circumstances, prior criminal histories, current offending and my assessment as to your rehabilitative prospects. These considerations are all relevant to my instinctive synthesis.
Sentencing principles
118The basic purposes for which a court may impose a sentence are punishment, general and specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. Generally, I accept that given your youth, rehabilitation is a primary sentencing consideration.
119In sentencing the three of you I have taken into account the maximum sentences that apply in your case and the general landscape for the offending, particularly burglary and home invasion. I also take into account the sentencing guidelines referred to in s 5 of the Sentencing Act1991 (Vic), where relevant to your case.
120Mr Meikhail you have pleaded guilty to two indictments and as I’ve indicated your offending is serious, of a higher volume and value, more persistent and over a longer period of time. The prosecution submit that the gravity of your offending warrants a term of imprisonment, structured with a non-parole period. Your Counsel submits that a combination sentence of imprisonment, comprised of the period you have already served in custody, and a Community Corrections Order (”CCO”) is within range. Your Counsel submits that your case calls for a measure of leniency, given your remorse, your youth and your substantial demonstrated reformation.
121I had you assessed for both a CCO and a Youth Justice Centre Order. You were assessed as suitable for a CCO. The pre-sentence reports confirms your remorse for your offending, victim empathy, growing insight and maturity. You told the author that you maintain a commitment to sustain an offence free lifestyle, noting that you surround yourself with ‘people who inspire you’ and reporting that you have ‘too many opportunities to lose now’. You were also assessed as suitable for a Youth Justice Centre Order. The author of the report notes that even though you are assessed as a suitable candidate ‘it is respectfully considered that a community based disposition may be the most conducive towards [your] rehabilitation given [you have] demonstrated a period of stability over the last 24 months by maintaining employment, strengthening family relationships, completing multiple episodes of treatment in the community and obtaining [your] drivers licence with no further alleged offending during this time’.
122This observation echoes the opinion also expressed by Ms Harding in her report, where she states. ‘it is respectfully advised that a period of incarceration would impede Mina’s positive trajectory; whilst he requires some ongoing support to achieve his goals, Mina has continued to work diligently since his period of adult remand to change his life course’.
123I accept on the evidence that returning you to a custodial environment will impede your rehabilitative prospects. I accept that you have engaged in meaningful and substantial efforts that indicate you have now chosen a different path for yourself. I also accept that your period in adult custody has had a salutary impact, as demonstrated by your conduct over the last two years. Of course, your rehabilitation is not the only relevant consideration. In particular, general deterrence and denunciation are still important sentencing considerations. You have served 65 days in adult custody. Nothing is as punitive as prison. At the same, as the Court of Appeal in Boulton[31] observed, a CCO can be used to rehabilitate and punish simultaneously, particularly in the case of a young offender. Instead of needing to give less weight to denunciation or specific or general deterrence, in order to promote a young offender’s rehabilitation, the Court will be able to fashion a CCO which adequately achieves all of those purposes at once. As the order of seriousness of offending conduct increases, so the likelihood that such a disposition will be appropriate diminishes, but it may remain an option that is open, even in case of very serious offending.[32]
[31]Boulton v The Queen [2014] VSCA 342.
[32]Bradshaw v The Queen [2017] VSCA 273, [49].
124Having considered your case very carefully, I have reached the conclusion that a combined order in your case remains open and is appropriate. I consider that all relevant sentencing considerations can be appropriately balanced and reflected in a sentence that does not require you to serve any additional immediate imprisonment but that allows you to remain in the community supervised and supported on a lengthy and onerous CCO.
125In relation to you Mr Zreika the prosecution accept that it is open to deal with you by way of a combined sentence. Your Counsel submits that a CCO alone is capable of adequately punishing you and reflecting all other relevant considerations. If a term of imprisonment is required, then it is submitted that it should not exceed the period you have served on remand.
126In your case Mr Kamil, while the prosecution understandably express reservations and concerns in relation to your rehabilitative prospects, there was an acceptance that you had served a substantial period of custody on these matters and that you now required intensive supports to assist in your transition back into the community.
127In sentencing the three of you I also take into account the principles of proportionality and parsimony, that is the sentence must be no more severe than is necessary to meet the purposes of sentencing. In particular Mr Zreika in your case this has caused me to give serious consideration to whether you should be sentenced to a term of imprisonment on these charges. Your offending is relatively confined; you had just turned 18 years of age; you have no prior criminal history; you have been on supervised bail now for an extended period and I accept that your prospects of rehabilitation are excellent. You have served time on remand in relation to this matter, which I will take into account. However, after considering all relevant factors I am of the view that you should be sentenced to a CCO. You were also assessed for such an order and deemed suitable.
128In all of your cases, I also take into account the principle of totality. I must ensure that the sentence imposed reflects your overall criminality and circumstances. In relation to a number of these charges, I am of the view that they can properly be viewed as part of a series of offences of the same or similar character, thus warranting the imposition of aggregate sentences.
Sentence
MEIKHAIL
129On all charges, you are convicted and sentenced as follows:
130On indictment L10805852:
131Charges 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15 I sentence you to an aggregate term of 65 days’ imprisonment and a two year and eight month CCO.
132On Charge 13 you are sentenced to 65 days’ imprisonment.
133On Charge 16 you are sentenced to 65 days’ imprisonment.
134On Charge 17 you are convicted and discharged.
135The base sentence is the term imposed on Charges 1-12, 14 and 15, and the sentences imposed on Charges 13 and 16 are to be served concurrently on the base sentence.
136On indictment L10805863 I sentence you as follows:
137Charges 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 you are sentenced to an aggregate term of 65 days’ imprisonment and a two year and eight month CCO.
138Charge 1 you are sentenced to 65 days’ imprisonment.
139Charge 9 you are sentenced to 30 days’ imprisonment.
140The base sentence is the term imposed on Charges 2-8, that is the 65 days’ imprisonment, and the sentences on Charges 1 and 9 are to be served concurrently on the base sentence.
141In other words, I make no orders for cumulation on indictment L10805852 and I make no orders for cumulation on indictment L10805863. This means that all terms of imprisonment are to be served concurrently and the total effective sentence is 65 days’ imprisonment to be followed by a CCO of two years and eight months’ duration.
142As between the two indictments, I make no orders for cumulation which results in a total effective sentence of 65 days’ imprisonment followed by two CCO of two year and eight month CCO. In relation to the two CCO’s the conditions are to operate concurrent.[33]
[33] s 41(2) Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).
143The conditions of each CCO are as follows: 260 hours work (offset 100 hours against treatment); supervision; treatment and rehabilitation for drugs and for mental health; and programs to reduce reoffending.
ZREIKA
144On all charges you are convicted and sentenced as follows:
145On Charges 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 you are sentenced to a CCO of 15 months.
146On Summary Charge 22 you are convicted and fined $300.
147On Charge 9 you are convicted and discharged.
148On Charge 10 you are convicted and fined $100.
149The following conditions are imposed on your CCO: 80 hours community work (offset 80 hours against treatment); supervision; treatment and rehabilitation for drugs and mental health; and programs to reduce reoffending.
KAMIL
150On all charges you are convicted and sentenced as follows:
151On Charge 3 and Charge 4 you are sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment, in other words 486 days.
152On all other Charges, namely, Charges 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 you are sentenced to 90 days’ imprisonment and a CCO, for 18 months.
153Charge 3 is the base sentence and 30 days of the aggregate term imposed on all other charges, that is the 90 days, is to be served cumulatively.
154The conditions of the CCO are: supervision, treatment and rehabilitation for drugs, medical and mental health; and that you comply with the Justice Plan. I also impose judicial monitoring and your first date for monitoring is 15 August 2022 at 9.30am.
155This arrives at a total effective sentence of 516 days imprisonment and a CCO of 18 months, with conditions.
156As for s 18 declarations, for Mr Mekhail I declare that he has served 65 days presentence detention. For Mr Kamil I declare that 486 days has been served as presentence detention.
157Pursuant to s 6AAA I declare that but for your pleas of guilty, you would have been sentenced as follows: Mr Meikhail to a total effective sentence of three years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 18 months’ imprisonment; Mr Zreika to ten months’ imprisonment combined with a two and half year CCO; and Mr Kamil to a total effective sentence of two years and ten months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 14 months’ imprisonment.
158As for mandatory licence disqualification period, Mr Meikhail all licences are cancelled and disqualified for a period of 28 days on Charges 2 and 6 on indictment L10805863. In relation to Mr Kamil, on Charge 1 all licences are cancelled and disqualified for a period of three months.
159I make the forfeiture and disposal orders, which were unopposed, in the terms sought. [i]
[i] The terms of the CCO’s were explained in open Court to each accused and all accused consented to the making of the orders.
0
10
1