Director of Public Prosecutions v Kizana
[2025] VCC 215
•4 March 2025
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for PublicationCase No. 23-01663
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS v JOSEPH KIZANA ---
JUDGE:
HER HONOUR JUDGE ELLIS
WHERE HELD:
Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:
25 February 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:
4 March 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:
DPP v Kizana
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:
[2025] VCC 215
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---Subject:CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: 11 charges of using false document to prejudice other – offending sophisticated, brazen and protracted over three year period – substantial collection of false documentation – $6.4 million obtained from lenders – no prior criminal history – mental health difficulties enlivening Verdins Limb 5 – valuable plea of guilty – excellent prospects of rehabilitation – medium level of objective seriousness – dishonesty measured by misrepresentation of risk despite repayment of loans – regard to current sentencing practices – term of imprisonment warranted – combination sentence appropriate
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act1958 (Vic); Sentencing Act1991 (Vic)
Cases Cited: R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; CDPP v Bezhenar [2022] VCC 1569.
Sentence: Aggregate 6 months imprisonment in combination with 2 year Community Correction Order
---
APPEARANCES:
Counsel Solicitors For the DPP Mr M. Cookson Office of Public Prosecutions For the Accused Mr C. Farrington (Plea)
Ms S. Tricarico (Sentence)HER HONOUR:
1Joseph Kizana, you have pleaded guilty to 11 charges of using a false document to prejudice other, contrary to s 83A(2) of the Crimes Act1958 (Vic) which attracts a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.
Circumstances of offending:
2The circumstances of your offending were set out in a Prosecution Opening which was initially prepared for Sentence Indication Hearing (Exhibit A).
3The offending took place over the space of three and a half years, between 2019 and 2022.
4The charges against you relate to a series of fraudulent residential mortgage loans submitted by you through various financial institutions.
5To obtain these loans, you provided falsified financial documents, with the intent to materially misrepresent or omit information, to enable you to obtain a financial loan for a sum larger than would have been provided had the lender known your true circumstances.
6You provided these documents knowing them to be false and did so with the intention of inducing the relevant bank in each case to accept them as genuine and, by reason of so accepting them, do some act to the bank's prejudice.
7In each instance, you signed Borrower Privacy, Co-Borrower and ID Verification information forms confirming that the information contained in the application was true and correct.
8At the time of the offending you were aged between 49 and 52 years. You were self-employed, owning and managing a pizza restaurant with your wife Milady Kizana, which you did for 15 years.
9Turning now to the circumstances of each charge.
Charge 1
10On 6 June 2019 you submitted a mortgage application with the National Australia Bank for the refinancing of your property situated at 11 Cousen Place, Gladstone Park. This property was originally purchased by you and your wife in 2008.
11The total loan amount requested to refinance the property was $500,000. The total of the loan was split over two different home loan packages.
12You provided documentation to the National Australia Bank indicating the loan was for the purpose of planning for your retirement.
13In the application, you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a net profit of over $214,500 for the 2017 financial year, and over $256,600 for the 2018 financial year. You signed a 'Privacy and Confidentiality Consent' form confirming the information contained in the application was true, correct, and complete.
14To satisfy the income verification requirements of the NAB, you submitted the following documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false.
a)2017/2018 Partnership Tax Return for J Kizana and M.H. Kizana;
b)2017/2018 Individual Tax Return for Joseph Kizana;
c)2017/2018 Notice of Assessment for Joseph Kizana; and
d)2018 J Kizana and MH Kizana trading as North Side Pizza Financial statements.
15Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the NAB for the total value of $500,000, and on 24 June 2019 a mortgage was placed on the property.
Charge 2
16On 30 September 2020, you submitted a mortgage application with the NAB for the purchase of vacant land situated at 14 Jules Street, St Leonards.
17The land was purchased for $279,950 and the total loan amount requested was $224,000. The application was for a NAB Tailored Home Loan.
18In the application, you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating an income of over $188,000 for the 2019 financial year and over $203,900 for the 2020 financial year.
19To satisfy the income verification requirements of the NAB, you submitted a number of false documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false including tax returns and a Notice of Assessment.
20Based on the information you provided, the loan was approved by the NAB on 7 October 2020 for the total value of $224,000.
Charge 3
21On 1 December 2020, you submitted a mortgage application with the NAB to refinance your property situated at 31 Canning Street, Mickleham. The total loan amount requested to refinance the property was $600,000.
22The application was for a NAB Tailored Home Loan and you provided a statutory declaration indicating the funds were to be utilised for the purchase of an investment property.
23In the application, you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a monthly combined income with your wife of $22,125.72.
24To satisfy the income verification requirements of the NAB, on 2 December 2020 you submitted a number of documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false, including 2019/2020 tax returns and a Notice of Assessment.
25Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the NAB on 2 December 2020 for the total value of $600,000.
Charge 4
26On 28 November 2020 you submitted a mortgage application with the NAB for the purchase of vacant land situated at 4 Hakuba Way, Winter Valley. The land was purchased for $145,000 and the total loan amount requested was $128,000.
27The application was for a NAB Tailored Home Loan. In the application you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating an income of $188,065 for the 2019 financial year and $203,971 for the 2020 financial year.
28Again, to satisfy the income verification requirements, you submitted documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false, including 2019/2020 tax returns and a Notice of Assessment.
29Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the NAB on 4 December 2020 for the total value of $128,000.
Charge 5
30On 29 November 2021, you submitted a mortgage application with the Commonwealth Bank to refinance your property at 31 Canning Street, Mickleham. The total loan amount requested to refinance the property was $820,000.
31The application was for a standard variable rate home loan, and you provided the following reasons for seeking credit:
a)Refinancing of an existing NAB home loan - $600,000;
b)Alterations and additions to an owner-occupied dwelling - $50,000.; and
c)Other (swimming pool, furniture, computers et cetera) - $170,000.
32Again, to satisfy the loan serviceability conditions, you utilised earnings derived from your partnership with your wife, trading as North Side Pizza.
33In the application, you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a joint annual income of $457,674.
34To satisfy the income verification requirements, you submitted a number of documents as part of the application while knowing them to be false, including tax returns and a Notice of Assessment for the previous financial year.
35Based on the information provided, on 3 December 2021 the loan was approved by the Commonwealth Bank for the total value of $820,000. On 6 December 2021, the Commonwealth Bank repaid the sum of $595,389 to the NAB to discharge of the mortgage held over the property.
Charge 6
36On 1 December 2021, you submitted a mortgage application with the Commonwealth Bank for the purchase of a property situated at 142 Sterling Drive, Keilor East.
37The property was purchased for $720,000 and the total loan amount requested was $576,000. The application submitted was for a one year fixed rate Home Loan.
38To satisfy the loan serviceability conditions, you utilised earnings derived from your partnership with your wife, trading as North Side Pizza.
39In the application you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a joint annual income of $457,674.
40You submitted a number of documents as part of the application, including individual tax returns and Notices of Assessment.
41Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the Commonwealth Bank on 7 December 2021 for the total value of $576,000.
Charge 7
42On 9 November 2021, you submitted a mortgage application with the Commonwealth Bank for the refinancing of the following properties:
a)11 Cousen Place, Gladstone Park;
b)14 Jules Street, St Leonards; and
c)4 Hakuba Way, Winter Valley.
43The total loan amount requested to refinance the properties was $1,020,600.
44The application submitted was for the following four separate loans:
a)A two year Fixed Rate Investment Home loan - $500,300;
b)A three year Fixed Rate Investment Home Loan - $225,000;
c)A one year Fixed Rate Investment Home Loan - $128,000; and
d)A two year Fixed Rate Investment Home Loan - $167,300.
45To satisfy the loan serviceability conditions, you utilised earnings derived from your partnership with your wife. You provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a net profit of over $441,900 for the 2020 financial year and $472,000 for the 2021 financial year.
46To satisfy the income verification requirements, you submitted various documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false.
47Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the Commonwealth Bank on 15 December 2021 for the total value of $1,020,600.
Charge 8
48On 31 January 2022, you submitted a mortgage application with Great Southern Bank for the purchase of a property situated at 14 Dunfield Drive, Gladstone Park.
49The property was purchased for $690,000 and the total loan amount requested was $552,000. The application submitted was for a Basic Variable Home Loan.
50To satisfy the loan serviceability conditions of Great Southern Bank, you utilised your 2020/2021 yearly income based on individual tax returns.
51In the application, you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating your current income for serviceability of the loan was $228,528 per year, derived from your 2020 individual income of $236,350 and your 2021 individual income of $220,705.
52You submitted documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false, including your tax return, Notice of Assessment and partnership tax return for the previous financial year. You also included:
·A Business Activity Statement – July 2021 to September 2021
·An letter purportedly authored by accountant FS Spagnolo and Co; and
·Primary Owner Rental Statement (purportedly generated by estate agent Barry Plant) for 11 Cousen Place, Gladstone Park, which listed Ahmad Elbazizak as tenant and Dersim Yildiz as property manager.
53With respect to the documentation ostensibly created by FS Spagnolo & Co (Aust) Pty Ltd, the purported author Laurence Roso did not complete this document. Mr Roso confirmed that you have never been a client of his or his accountancy firm. Each of the documents are said to be false.
54With respect to the Primary Owner rental statement from Barry Plant in Glenroy depicting rental income for 11 Cousen Place, Gladstone Park, this too was a false document. Mr Yildiz has confirmed that you were not a client of his. Further there was no recorded bond in the name of Ahmad Elbaizak, believed to be a fictitious name.
55Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by Great Southern Bank for the total value of $552,000 on 7 February 2022.
Charge 9
56On 19 May 2022, you submitted a mortgage application with the Commonwealth Bank for the purchase of a property situated at 5 Clarke Drive, Gladstone Park.
57The property was purchased for $811,000 and the total loan amount requested was $775,150. The application submitted was for a one year fixed rate investment Home Loan.
58To satisfy the serviceability conditions, you utilised earnings derived from your partnership with your wife trading as North Side Pizza.
59In the application you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a joint annual income of over $484,300.
60Again, you submitted documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false.
61Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the Commonwealth Bank on 9 June 2022 for the total value of $775,100.
Charge 10
62On 17 June 2022 you submitted a mortgage application with the Commonwealth Bank for the purchase of a property at 33 Wolverton Drive, Gladstone Park.
63The property was purchased for $688,000 and the total loan amount requested was $550,400. The application submitted was for a standard variable rate Investment home loan.
64Again, to satisfy the loan serviceability conditions, you utilised earnings derived from your partnership trading as North Side Pizza.
65In the application you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a joint annual income of over $484,300.
66To satisfy income verification requirements, you submitted documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false.
67Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the Commonwealth Bank on 20 June 2022 for the total value of $550,400.
Charge 11
68On 4 August 2022, you submitted a mortgage application with the Commonwealth Bank for the purchase of a property situated at 22 Snaefell Crescent, Gladstone Park.
69The property was purchased for $730,000 and the total loan amount requested was $700,150. The application submitted was for a Standard variable rate Investment home loan.
70Again, to satisfy the loan serviceability conditions, you utilised earnings derived from your partnership trading as North Side Pizza.
71In the application you provided a dishonest representation of your financial position by falsely stating a joint annual income of $457,674.
72To satisfy the income verification requirements of the Commonwealth Bank you submitted documents as part of the application, knowing them to be false. Included within the application were residential tenancy agreements for:
·11 Cousen Place, Gladstone Park;
·5 Clarke Drive Gladstone Park; and
·162 Carrick Drive, Gladstone Park.
73The tenancy agreements each demonstrated the existence of a current rental arrangement and the payment of a bond by a tenant.
74With respect to the property at Cousen Place, Gladstone Park, you submitted a tenancy agreement for a one year rental, listing Peter Fujito as the tenant with a bond of $2,000. Information with the RTBA indicated there was no bond recorded in this name. Mr Fujito declined to make a statement.
75With respect to the property at Clarke Drive, Gladstone Park, you submitted a tenancy agreement indicating a one-year rental for the preceding 12 months with a tenant Michael Yacoub, and included a document depicting a payment of a bond. Mr Yacoub declined a request to make a statement regarding the Rental Tenancy Agreement.
76With respect to the property at Carrick Drive, Gladstone Park, the agreement purported to be for a one year fixed rental with a tenant Evren Kurtoglu of 21 Rubicon Court, Dallas, and a document depicting a bond of $3,500 having been paid on 15 October 2021. Information provided by the RTBA confirmed that there had been no recorded bond in the name of Evren Kurtoglu and no bonds paid for 162 Carrick Drive, Gladstone Park since 2009. Evren Kurtoglu is believed to be a fictitious person created for the purpose of the application.
77Based on the information provided, the loan was approved by the Commonwealth Bank on 4 August 2022 for the total value of $700,150.
Summary
78Overall, between 6 June 2019 and 4 August 2022, you submitted 11 home loan applications, and obtained the following.
a)Credit for the purchase of five properties to the value of $3,505,700; and
b)Credit from refinancing existing properties to the value of $2,940,600.
79With respect to the financial statement from your partnership trading as North Side Pizza, a compilation report indicated they had been prepared by various accountants. Those documents purported to have been prepared by Camille Nahas from CNA Accountants Pty Ltd and Laurence Roso from FS Spagnolo & Co (Aust) Pty Ltd. Neither of these individuals completed these financial statements.
80A table contained within the Prosecution summary reflects the significant discrepancy between your true income and that submitted within the various documents.
81The total benefit obtained was $6,446,300.
82You were arrested on 26 September 2022. When interviewed by police you said that you had sold your business North Side Pizza after 15 years and now work for yourself, renovating and selling houses. You said you:
(a)had been a client of CNA Accountants since you were 16 or 17;
(b)prepared all the financials for the business;
(c)recalled refinancing the property at 11 Cousen Place, Gladstone Park but did not recall the documents provided to the Bank;
(d)used the money to partly build your house in Mickleham at Canning Drive;
(e)recalled applying for a loan for 14 Jules Street, St Leonards but did not recall the documents provided to the bank and denied providing them;
(f)recalled the application for land at 4 Hakuba Way, Winter Valley and borrowing money, but stated you had not seen the documents before that were provided to the bank;
(g)recalled applying for refinancing for Canning Drive, Mickleham and attending the branch to provide your licence and sign papers;
(h)when asked if you prepared the documents for the loan or if someone else prepared them, you answered 'no comment'
(i)confirmed that you did refinance the house, renovate it, and you sold it in January;
(j)recalled borrowing money for the house at 142 Sterling Drive, Keilor East and answered 'no comment' when questioned as to who prepared the documents;
(k)recalled refinancing with the Commonwealth Bank for the three properties at 11 Cousen Place Gladstone Park, 14 Jules Street St Leonards and 4 Hakuba Way Winter Valley but answered 'no comment' regarding the documents used for the application;
(l)recalled borrowing money for the purchase of 14 Dunfield Drive, Gladstone Park, again answering 'no comment' regarding the documents used for the application;
(m) confirmed you sold the property situated at 14 Jules Street, St Leonards for $450,000 and placed the profits into your account saying you 'just use it as we go';
(n)recalled applying for the loan for 5 Clarke Drive, Gladstone Park but answered 'no comment' regarding the documents used for the application;
(o)you did not know the accountants FS Spagnola and Co and had not seen relevant documents before.
83You were bailed following the interview and you have not spent any time in custody.
Criminal History
84You come before the court with no prior criminal history and you have lived a productive, law abiding life until this offending.
Personal Circumstances
85I will now turn to your personal circumstances. You are now 54 years old, almost 55. You were born in Tripoli, Libya and are the eldest of six children. You immigrated to Australia when you were 11 months old. Your father spent 15 years working for General Motors Holden before purchasing and operating a milk bar. You married your wife at the age of 18 and you now have three adult children together.
86Upon arrival into Australia your family settled in Coburg, and you commenced your primary schooling in Fawkner. You received language lessons in the family home to ensure that you were fluent in Lebanese. You completed high school at two different schools leaving school at the end of Year 11 to work with your father in the milk bar. You were responsible for the day-to-day operation of the shop and your father handled the financial side of the business. You worked at the milk bar for six years before the business closed when it became unprofitable due to rising rent.
87You then entered into an agreement with a landlord in relation to an existing milk bar business which had previously failed. Whilst operating the milk bar you began to experience blackouts and full body tremors. You were diagnosed with epilepsy. This led to your driver's licence being suspended on medical grounds. Your inability to drive a motor vehicle placed immense pressure on the business. You were unable to employ anybody else to fulfil your role and ultimately the business closed, and you declared bankruptcy. You and your family moved back in with your parents and you received Centrelink benefits for 12 months.
88You then secured employment as a full-time car park attendant and you were promoted to a managerial position where you remained for 10 years. In 2007 you purchased a cafe at Northland shopping centre which you operated for two years. You then purchased a pizza shop which you ran until its closure in 2021. You also purchased a cafe in Campbellfield in 2014 which you operated until 2018.
Mental Health
89It is clear that you have experienced a number of traumatic events over the past several years. This included the loss of your family home by fire in 2017 which caused you considerable distress. You are said to have repeatedly ruminated on this event.
90I have had regard to the report prepared by psychologist Luke Armstrong. He notes that whilst you do not meet the criteria for being diagnosed with PTSD in relation to the house fire, he considers you to be presenting with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms and you could appropriately be diagnosed with 'Other Specified Trauma- And Stressor Related Disorder'.
91Mr Armstrong states that he believes that this offending was partially due to clouded judgement as a result of these mental health consequences, and an 'obsession to recreate what (you) believed (your) children had lost following the fire'. However, understandably, no submission is made that your moral culpability is reduced by virtue of this opinion as expressed by Mr Armstrong.
92Furthermore, your adult son Michael was king hit in January 2021 which led to his hospitalisation for bleeding on the brain requiring surgery. This led to significant health consequences for him, and as a result you and your wife have been providing him with care. This event further worsened your PTSD symptoms.
93Mr Armstrong notes that you have severe Major Depressive Disorder and have significant depressive symptoms centring around your perceived failure as a husband and father. He considers that your experience of prison would be particularly arduous in light of this.
94Although you have engaged with psychologist Andrea McNeill on two occasions remotely, there is a reluctance to return to counselling, despite the fact that it would likely be beneficial to you. Ms McNeill has assessed you as suffering from Major Depressive Disorder, with severe symptoms. She has recommended you consult your GP to commence anti-depressant medication.
95Ms MacNeill considers that imprisonment would likely weigh more heavily on you due to your vulnerabilities and mental health. To that end, your counsel submits that limb 5 of the principles set out in R vVerdins[1] are enlivened. I accept this and I take it into account. The prosecution did not take issue with this submission.
[1] (2007) 16 VR 269.
96I have also had regard more generally to the matters raised within the psychological reports filed.
Plea of Guilty
97Your matter resolved following a sentence indication hearing. The matter was originally listed for this hearing in December 2024 but was not able to be heard for reasons outside of your control. The matter returned to court in January 2025 as a matter of some urgency given that the trial date was set down for 4 February 2025. The matter resolved within a matter of days, and you entered a plea of guilty. Proceedings against your wife were discontinued.
98Your plea was therefore entered at a relatively late stage, although I appreciate some of the delay is not attributable to you. The plea of guilty is a valuable one with significant utilitarian value. You have spared the community the substantial expense of a trial, demonstrated accountability and assisted the course of justice. You have accepted responsibility for your conduct which is indicative of your remorse.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
99A number of character references were tendered on your behalf as prepared by many of your friends and family. Your wife describes how your self-blame has led to what she observes to be a deterioration in your mental and physical health. Seeking help seems to be overwhelming but ultimately will be necessary for you in order to be able to move forward with your life.
100You are said to be extremely ashamed of your actions and regret the situation you have created for yourself and your family, for whom you have worked so hard to provide and to be a role model to. Clearly you have lived a law-abiding despite battling mental health issues, in order to be able to provide for your family. I do not underestimate the significance of this, nor the fact that you have reached the age of almost 55 without any interactions with the criminal justice system. I accept that you are a much-loved father, husband, and friend to many.
101I take into account that you are remorseful, as has been conveyed to your referees and also to Mr Armstrong.
102Given your long history of hard work, your lack of any previous criminal history, your strong support system and evident remorse, I consider that you have excellent prospects of rehabilitation. These will only be enhanced if you receive the mental health treatment you need to manage your depression. I note that Corrections considers you to be a low risk of re-offending.
Nature and Gravity of Offending
103Your counsel has submitted that the gravamen of this offence is not the financial advantage you received. They submit rather that the dishonesty is to be assessed by reference to the prejudice suffered by the lenders. Mr Farrington submits that each of the loans advanced to you were safely secured against real property, and notes that you met the loan repayments. Further, on each occasion once the properties relevant to a charge was sold, the mortgage was fully discharged returning the bank to its original position – albeit Mr Farrington submits, enriched through the interest rate payments made during the currency of the loans.
104Whilst this may be the case, the reality is there was still some risk to the lenders, particularly if there was a change in the property market. The prejudice is the greater degree of risk involved. The banks would not have loaned you this money if they knew the reality of your situation.
105By using the false documents, you caused an increased risk of default to each lender. The prosecution submits that the offending should be considered in the upper range of seriousness, namely a relatively high level of dishonesty-related offending. Whilst I consider the offending serious, I am not convinced it falls within the upper range.
106The maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment reflects the seriousness with which this offence is viewed. Whilst I accept that ultimately the false documents were submitted so as to enable you to obtain a loan for properties which you later sold, the reality is your offending was systematic, protracted and in some instances increasingly more serious by virtue of the various documents filed in support of your application.
107In all, you submitted over 11 home loan applications which resulted in loans of over $6.4m being granted. The offending is not to be measured in the amount of money that the banks were prepared to loan you, but in terms of its prolific nature. Your offending involved a degree of planning and organisation and occurred over a three-year period. Submitting false tax returns and associated documents is serious, and significantly there were other documents provided in support of the loan applications, which adds a degree of sophistication to the offending.
108As the prosecution submitted, your offending was brazen. It undermines the integrity of lending institutions and transactions, which form part of a system reliant on honesty. The prosecution submits that your offending warrants a term of imprisonment with a head sentence and a non-parole period. It is submitted that the court must consider the importance of general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment in these circumstances.
109Your counsel submits that a community corrections order alone is within range and that the imposition of community work hours as part of an order, in conjunction with a therapeutic component, would address general deterrence and denunciation.
110At the sentence indication hearing, I indicated that having regard to the serious nature of the offending, and what at that stage was submitted by the prosecution to be a question of parity (given the likely term of imprisonment to be imposed against your son Michael for like offending), I indicated that a sentence involving immediate imprisonment would be warranted. To that end I indicated that I would impose a combination sentence without indicating the duration to be served in custody. Your counsel urged me at the plea stage not to imprison you having regard to all of the matters in mitigation.
111At the plea, the prosecution no longer submitted that parity is an issue, having regard to the fact that your son Michael pleaded guilty to similar but not related offending. His offending is said to have occurred over a longer period, involving less loan applications and resulting in loans being granted of approximately $2.5m. However, Mr. Cookson submitted that the sentence imposed against Michael Kizana is relevant with respect to current sentencing practices.
112Current sentencing practices is a matter to which I must have regard but this is not the controlling factor. I take your son's sentence into account in this way only. On this issue the prosecution drew my attention to another County Court sentence imposed in a matter of CDPP v Bezhenar,[2] involving a Commonwealth charge, whereby the sentencing judge noted the significance of general deterrence. Offences of this kind undermine public confidence in the integrity of such documents, in that case Commonwealth documents. They are said to be difficult to detect, reinforcing the need to uphold the integrity of these official documents.
[2] [2022] VCC 1569.
Sentencing purposes
113There are a number of purposes for which a court may impose a sentence, namely just punishment, both specific and general deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. In determining an appropriate sentence, I am required to take into account these objectives as well as various other matters including the gravity of the offending, your culpability, the maximum penalty applicable and your personal circumstances.
114The sentence I pass must balance the interests of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the community's interests in ensuring that as far as possible you are rehabilitated. I am to have regard to the principles of parsimony, and I do so.
115Ultimately the law says that a court must always regard imprisonment as a disposition of last resort and may consider, even in cases of serious offences, that a community corrections order is a punitive disposition capable of addressing all relevant sentencing considerations.
116Following the sentence indication hearing and again the plea, I have given careful consideration as to whether a community corrections order alone would meet all of the objectives of sentencing as set out under the Sentencing Act. Your rehabilitation is significant and as I have discussed I take into account your previous good character and prospects of rehabilitation. But ultimately having considered matters carefully, the prolific and ongoing nature of your offending is such that no sentence other than one involving a period of imprisonment would suffice.
117Having regard to the fact that each of these offences are founded on the same facts, or form, or are part of, a series of offences of the same or of a similar character, I have determined that it is appropriate to impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment in respect of those offences in place of a separate sentence of imprisonment with respect to each of them. In doing so, I have regard to totality.
118Accordingly, I impose the following sentence.
119On all 11 charges, you are convicted and sentenced to an aggregate period of six months' imprisonment. This is to be followed by a period of a community corrections order for a period of two years. Given that I am sentencing you to a period of imprisonment, I do not intend to impose a condition with respect to unpaid community work. In doing so, I have had regard to your previous good character. However, there will be a condition of the order that you must undergo treatment and rehabilitation with respect to your mental health, as is directed by Corrections.
Core conditions
120There are also a number of core conditions that attach to a community corrections order.
· You must not commit any other offence punishable by imprisonment during the operational period of two years.
· You must comply with any and all obligations or requirements of Corrections.
· You must report to and receive visits from Corrections.
· You must report to your nearest designated community corrections centre, which will be at Melbourne, within two clear working days of your release from custody.
· You must let a Community Corrections officer know within two working days of a change of address or job.
· You must not leave Victoria without first getting permission; and
· You must obey all lawful instructions from Corrections.
These are the mandatory core conditions that attach to any community correction order.
121At some point, you are going to be asked to sign a document indicating that you have heard what those conditions are and that you understand what they are. I am not going to make you do that at this point. I need to tell you that if you breach the community corrections order by committing further offences, or if for instance you did not comply with one of the conditions, if for instance you did not undergo the treatment and rehabilitation component, then what would most likely happen is that the matter would be brought back before me on a breach and I would then likely have to re-sentence you for this offending. It is also possible that I would have to sentence you for the breach itself. So it is important that you comply with the conditions of the community corrections order, because I am sure the last thing that you want is to have to come back before the court and face further proceedings or possible re-sentencing.
122I am going to ask you now whether or not you understand the conditions that I have outlined to you and whether you agree to abide by those conditions.
123OFFENDER: Yes.
124HER HONOUR: All right.
Section 6AAA Sentencing Act
125I also indicate that pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act1991 (Vic), but for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to a period of 20 months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 14 months.
126There is no pre-sentence detention.
- - -
0
3
0