Director of Public Prosecutions v Knight
[2023] VCC 612
•14 April 2023
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Suitable for Publication | |
AT Melbourne
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR-22-00486
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| DWAINE KNIGHT |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE KELLY | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 3 April 2023 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 14 April 2023 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Knight | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2023] VCC 612 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Failing to render assistance – handling stolen goods – lengthy criminal history - childhood social deprivation – prospects of rehabilitation – current sentencing practices.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1958; Road Safety Act 1986; Control of Weapons Act 1990; Sentencing Act 1991; Firearms Act 1996.
Cases Cited: R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; Director of Public Prosecutions v Merrett [2007] VSCA 1; Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506; Bugmy v R (2013) 169 CLR 571; Worboyes v The Queen (2021) 96 MVR 344; Panourakis v The Queen [2021] VSCA 259; Neskovski v The Queen [2022] VSCA 86; Al-Anwiya v The Queen [2022] VSCA 181.
Sentence: 22 months imprisonment; 2 year Community Correction Order.
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr J. Lewis | Solicitor for the Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr A. Patton | Balmer & Associates |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Dwaine Knight, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident resulting in death[1] and one charge of handling stolen goods.[2] You have also pleaded guilty to the following summary charges: one charge of driving whilst disqualified,[3] one charge of driving an unregistered vehicle,[4] one charge of possession of ammunition without a licence,[5] and one charge of possession of a prohibited weapon without exemption or approval.[6]
[1] Contrary to ss 61(1)(b); 61(3) Road Safety Act 1986.
[2] Contrary to s 88 Crimes Act 1958.
[3] Contrary to s 30(1) Road Safety Act 1986.
[4] Contrary to s 7(1)(a) Road Safety Act 1986.
[5] Contrary to s 124(1) Firearms Act 1996.
[6] Contrary to s 5AA Control of Weapons Act 1990.
2 The maximum penalties for the offences are:
(a) Charge 1, failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident resulting in death, 10 years' imprisonment or a level 5 fine up to 1,200 penalty units;
(b) Charge 2, handling stolen goods, 15 years' imprisonment;
(c) Summary Charge 4, driving whilst disqualified, two years' imprisonment or a fine of up to 240 penalty units;
(d) Summary Charge 5, use of an unregistered motor vehicle on a highway, a fine of up to 50 penalty units;
(e) Summary Charge 13, possession of ammunition without a license, a fine of up to 40 penalty units; and
(f) Summary Charge 14, possession of a prohibited weapon without exemption or approval, two years' imprisonment or a fine of up to 240 penalty units.
Circumstances of the offending
3 The circumstances of your offending are as follows.
4 On 1 July 2021 you were driving a silver 2000 Holden Commodore. Mr Weegink, the deceased, was driving a 2013 Yamaha R1 motorcycle.
5 The vehicle you were driving was owned by your father. It was unregistered. That gives rise to Summary Charge 5. You were also a disqualified driver at the time - that gives rise to Summary Charge 4 - having been disqualified subject to a hearing at the Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court on 17 February 2021.
6 At 1.36 am on 1 July 2021 a witness, Samuel Eades, observed the motorcycle driven by Mr Weegink. The motorcycle was heading east at a fast speed on Thompsons Road in Cranbourne North.
7 A short time later Mr Eades came upon the scene of the collision between the motorcycle and the Commodore you had been driving. The Commodore was sitting across lanes. The rear bumper bar was detached and lying on the road. Mr Eades saw you picking up pieces of debris from the road. The motorcycle was on the side of the road and Mr Weegink was lying motionless under the guardrail at the side of the road. Mr Eades asked you if you had called Triple 0 or an ambulance.
8 You returned to the Commodore and moved the car towards the U-turn lane and stopped there. You left the Commodore and looked back at the collision scene and were again asked by Mr Eades whether you had called an ambulance. You replied that you would do it soon, but Mr Eades decided to do it himself. You then drove off, completing a U-turn, and heading west on Thompsons Road away from the collision scene. You did not attempt to assist Mr Weegink following the collision. And those are the facts relating to Charge 1.
9
At the collision scene police located a first aid kit which had been stolen from David Lobato on 28 June 2021. You have pleaded guilty to handling that stolen item.[7] You then made various calls over the next 12 hours after leaving the scene. These calls were made to a former partner, to a Ms Heather Decker, and to your mother. You admitted to having been in a collision with a motorcycle and you admitted to your former partner and to your mother that the rider was dead. The matter was reported to police by your sister at
3.19 pm and you were arrested shortly after at Frankston railway station.
[7] Charge 2.
10
On 2 July 2021 police conducted a search of the Commodore. They found in the vehicle various items, including shotgun ammunition, a knuckleduster,
two numberplates bearing the identification 1TH 9XV and a Kia car key. The numberplates were later identified as having been stolen on 25 June 2021. The Kia car key was identified as having been stolen on 28 June 2021. Police also located personal folders which were the property of David Lobato, which had been stolen at the same time as the first aid kit from his motor vehicle on 28 June 2021.
11 Also in the Commodore was a blue backpack containing personal cards in the name of Danielle Barry. These had been stolen from Ms Barry in April 2021. You pleaded guilty to these offences subsequent to a committal hearing and to pre-trial directions hearings.
Defence Submissions
12 Your counsel submitted that the offending the subject of Charge 1 is objectively serious, but is not a grave example of the offence of fail to render assistance. The fact that there were others at the collision scene who could help is relied on as support for this contention. Mr Patton concedes that the futility of any assistance that can be rendered is not a matter that reduces an offender's culpability, but you had lost your father weeks earlier and you were affected by grief which compromised your decision‑making.
13 You were processing this trauma at the time of the collision and had, in the preceding days, been using illicit substances. I am told that you were not using drugs on the day of the collision. It is also submitted by your counsel that there is a lack of various aggravating features in your case. Namely, you did not cause the collision and you did not attempt to conceal your involvement. You may not have explicitly concealed your involvement but you left the scene within at most several minutes and did not notify police of the incident. You did not wait for police to arrive and explain what had happened. You drove off and it was your sister who notified authorities.
14 Mr Patton concedes that the whole purpose of leaving the scene was to avoid contact with police given the other offences you knew you were committing and to conceal the fact that you had been driving whilst disqualified. It was also submitted that your failure to render assistance was the product of panic. Mr Patton argued that your actions in the hours immediately following the collision demonstrate distress and remorse. He points to your preparedness to plead guilty at an early stage as demonstrating remorse and points to your suicidal state in the aftermath of the collision as having been informed by your guilt and grief associated with your involvement in the collision and witnessing Mr Weegink's death.
15
He also submits that the principles of Bugmy are enlivened here owing to your traumatic childhood. The prosecution concedes this is so. Mr Patton points especially to the instability and substance abuse within your household when you were a child, as well as the trauma of witnessing repeated psychological and physical violence within the household as matters which reduce your moral culpability and which, more broadly, explain your near institutionalisation. I note that you have been sentenced to 11 terms of confinement, totalling almost 15 years. You have spent over 11 of the last 13 years in adult custody. Your longest period of freedom in this time is
10 months.
16 A report by a forensic psychologist, Catherine Stipis, dated 30 March 2023 was provided to the court. She diagnoses you with post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder, stimulant use disorder, cannabis use disorder, ADHD and with traits of borderline personality disorder. She also says that you may have an acquired brain injury due to a series of head injuries, although this provisional opinion needs exploration with formal neuropsychological testing.
17 Ms Stipis sets out a detailed history of your upbringing. This history is troubling. You have witnessed and experienced violence throughout your childhood. Ms Stipis believes that you are at a high risk of reoffending if your mental health issues and substance use problems are not addressed. She writes that you will be unlikely to benefit from further incarceration and would be more likely to benefit from intensive psychological treatment in a community setting.
Prosecution Submissions
18 The prosecution submits that Charge 1 is a serious example of the offence of failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident. It is submitted that the following features make it so:
(a), the collision was between a car and a motorcycle, such a collision creating obvious and well-known potential for injury;
(b), the collision involved considerable impact; and
(c), the deceased lay immobile at the edge of the roadway and was observed to be so by you before you left.
19 It is submitted that the objective gravity of the offending is high. Mr Lewis stresses that whilst you are not to be sentenced for any aspect of your driving leading up to the collision, the collision itself and the disastrous scene post‑collision are highly relevant. He argues that the collision involving a substantial impact, debris strewn across the road, and a man thrown from his motorbike lying dead or dying within your line of sight, called for a response from you which you did not make because you were consumed with self‑interest and self-preservation.
20
The circumstances of the collision must have made it apparent to you that
Mr Weegink was in grave need of attention. Your failure to render assistance to him in those circumstances elevates the objective gravity of your offending. It is no answer to point to the fact that other people at the scene were capable of interceding and rendering the assistance that you withheld. That fact does not operate to reduce the gravity of your offending or your failure to act.
21 It is further submitted that evidence of your remorse, beside your plea of guilty, is scant, notwithstanding your distress after the collision. Mr Lewis accepts that you have been diagnosed with a number of psychological disorders and those disorders are relevant to contextualise this offending notwithstanding that the principles in Verdins[8] are not enlivened.
[8]R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269.
22 The prosecution accepts that a combined term of imprisonment with a community correction order is within range having regard to your substantial pre‑sentence detention, but only if, on the material presented to the court, it can be demonstrated that you are capable of completing a community correction order. Mr Lewis underscored your poor compliance with court orders in the past and the fact that you were subject to a community correction order at the time of this offending.
23 These are matters that may undermine the court's faith in your capacity to complete a community correction order, although he acknowledges, with scrupulous fairness, that the letter from your peer educator at Port Phillip Prison provides a basis for some cautious optimism.
24 The prosecution accepts that your pleas have been entered at an early stage.
Personal Circumstances
25
I turn now to your personal circumstances. You are 33 years old and identify as Aboriginal. Your father died on 15 April 2021. You report having
15 siblings in total.
26
Your parents separated when you were four years old when your father assaulted your mother with a firearm. From the ages of
five to 11 you lived with your mother and stepfather. You describe being bashed by your stepfather constantly. You also witnessed violent assaults on your mother.
27 When you were 11 your mother dropped you at a police station and drove away because she was unable to care for you. You were placed in foster homes and residential care until you were 14. You frequently ran away.
28
You have had one long-term relationship in your life, which lasted about four years, from when you were 17 until you were 21. You have two sons of this union, twin boys who are now 13. You have not seen them since they were
six months old.
29 You have a history of self-harm and suicide attempts dating from when you were 13. You are currently engaging with the mental health service in custody. You had planned to take your life in the immediate aftermath of this collision, but your sister intervened and called the police. When arrested you were placed in the Acute Assessment Unit for eight days.
30 Your employment history is patchy, unsurprisingly, given how much time you have spent in gaol. For the past 15 years you have been enmeshed in a cycle of gaol, release, relapse into drug use, further offending and return to custody.
Criminal History
31 You have a long criminal history and many prior convictions. These offences go back to 2009 when you were about 19. Many of these offences are relevant. In 2009 you were convicted of driving whilst disqualified. In 2014 you were convicted of unlicensed driving and in 2021 you were convicted of failing to stop a vehicle on police direction and driving whilst suspended.
32 You have also been convicted of dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, possessing a controlled weapon without excuse, obtaining property by deception and others. Your criminal history is substantial and it reflects that you have been sentenced to many terms of gaol. The extent of which these prison sentences have deterred you from further offending is questionable.
33 Mr Patton argues that you need structure and supports in order to transition successfully from gaol into the community. You have been assessed as having a high risk of future offending without appropriate supports. You were on a community correction order at the time of this offending, but I am told you had not had sufficient time to engage in the therapeutic components of the order when you were returned to custody. The community correction order contravention report recommended that, notwithstanding further offending, the order should be confirmed and you should have the opportunity to engage in the therapeutic and rehabilitative opportunities presented by the community correction order.
Gravity of offending
34 I consider the objective seriousness of Charge 1, failing to render assistance, to be at the midrange. This is a difficult assessment.
35 The collision was a very serious one. Mr Weegink died soon after it. You did not leave him completely alone, but you risked delaying assistance unnecessarily by telling Mr Eades that you would call an ambulance when you did not intend to do so. Your reason for leaving the scene was to avoid police becoming aware of your other crimes.
Plea of guilty
36 I take into account your pleas of guilty which have a utilitarian benefit in dispensing with the need for a trial. You are, accordingly, entitled to a discount on your sentence. Your plea was made after a contested committal hearing had commenced, however, a second statement was provided by the reconstructionist at the committal and, as a consequence, the charge of dangerous driving causing death was discontinued. It was then that the matter resolved. The prosecution concedes that your plea in all of the circumstances was an early one. I consider that you have pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
37
The heavy burden imposed on the justice system as a result of the
COVID‑19 pandemic justifies further acknowledging the benefit of your pleas of guilty to the administration of justice. You are, accordingly, entitled
to a further discount on your sentence in keeping with the principles in
Worboyes v The Queen.[9]
[9]Worboyes v The Queen (2021) 96 MVR 344, 356-357 at [39].
Bugmy submissions
38 Mr Patton submitted that your sentence should be moderated to reflect the fact that your childhood experiences have left an indelible mark on your development and that your upbringing justifies an exercise in mercy. In Bugmy v The Queen the High Court said:
'The experience of growing up in an environment surrounded by alcohol abuse and violence may leave its mark on a person throughout life. Among other things, a background of that kind may compromise the person's capacity to mature and to learn from experience. It is a feature of the person's make-up and remains relevant to the determination of the appropriate sentence, notwithstanding that the person has a long history of offending. Because the effects of profound childhood deprivation do not diminish with the passage of time and repeated offending, it is right to speak of giving "full weight" to an offender's deprived background in every sentencing disposition.'[10]
[10]Bugmy v R (2013) 169 CLR 571, 594-5 at [43].
39 You have had a traumatic upbringing. You were subjected to physical and emotional abuse by your parents and your stepfather. You experienced profound instability in your life when placed into a series of foster homes and placements. I accept that these experiences have made you vulnerable to homelessness and criminal offending and that your moral culpability for this offending is reduced as a result. I have ameliorated the sentence I am to impose as a consequence.
Rehabilitation
40 A remarkable feature of your criminal history is that from your first appearance as an adult you have received gaol terms every time you have been sentenced until your appearance on 17 February 2021 when you were made the subject of a 12‑month community correction order. As noted, you did not have the time to engage in or complete the rehabilitative or therapeutic parts of that order before you were arrested and remanded for this offending.
41 It is not possible, therefore, to make an informed assessment of your capacity to develop the coping mechanisms you need to navigate life in the community, the demands of undergoing counselling, performing community work and complying with the directions of the Office of Corrections. Your prospects of rehabilitation hinge on your capacity to develop strategies for coping. There is some foundation for cautious optimism in your case. You were forthcoming and candid in your community correction order assessment. You told the officer who interviewed you that you regret your actions and that you are devastated by the impact that your failure to act must have had on the Weegink family.
42 You identified the maintenance of a relationship with your family as your main motivation to succeed in completing a community correction order. You also recognised that your sister had done the right thing by reporting you to the police. You also acknowledged that if you do not prioritise your rehabilitation, you risk losing your family support.
43 You were assessed by the Mental Health Advice and Response Service which noted a documented history of childhood neurodevelopmental disorders, complex post-traumatic stress disorder, polysubstance misuse and depression. Due to your history of emotional dysregulation, substance misuse and trauma, the clinician who assessed you found that you remain vulnerable to experiencing mood dysregulation and impulsivity in your life choices. He recommended that you require assistance in creating a meaningful structured routine, including vocational training, psychological counselling, drug counselling and creative outlets. It is to be hoped that you respond to the structure and support offered by a community correction order. Your rehabilitation is the community's surest safeguard against further offending.
Present Circumstances
44 You have been held in custody since your arrest on 1 July 2021. You have enrolled in the buprenorphine program and you described it to Ms Stipis as 'best thing I've ever put myself on'. You have remained drug-free in custody for the first time. You are employed as a unit billet. You have been unable to receive visits for the majority of your time on remand, even virtual visits. You have not been able to engage in any counselling or programs.
45 You have undergone 18 months on remand, much of it subject to restrictive protocols adopted to combat the COVID‑19 pandemic. The conditions under which you have been held are, therefore, more restrictive and onerous than those of a sentenced prisoner. I intend to moderate your sentence to acknowledge the onerousness of the conditions under which you have been incarcerated whilst on remand.
Sentencing Principles
46 Section 5 of the Sentencing Act provides that the only purposes for which you may be sentenced are:
(a) to punish you in a manner and to an extent which is just in all the circumstances;
(b) to deter you or others from committing similar offences in the future;
(c) to facilitate your rehabilitation;
(d) to manifest the denunciation of your conduct;
(e) to protect the community;
(f) a combination of two or more of these purposes.
47 Deterrence and denunciation are important purposes in sentencing you. However, I note that your offending is informed by your exposure to violence and dysfunction in your formative years and mental health and substance misuse. For that reason, I consider your rehabilitation is an important consideration. As Chief Justice French observed in Hogan v Hinch:
'Rehabilitation, if it can be achieved, is likely to be the most durable guarantor of community protection and is clearly in the public interest.'[11]
[11]Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506, 537 at [32].
48 A period of almost two years has elapsed between the day of the collision and today's sentence. Sentencing courts are entitled to take into account by way of mitigation the effect delay has had on the rehabilitation of the offender. As the Court of Appeal said in Merrett, Piggott and Ferrari:
'The relevance of delay lies rather in the effect which the lapse of time, however caused, has had on the accused. Delay constitutes a powerful mitigatory factor. In particular it focuses on issues of rehabilitation and fairness.'[12]
[12]Director of Public Prosecutions v Merrett & Ors [2007] VSCA 1 at [35].
49 From the same case His Honour President Maxwell, as he then was, later observed:
'There is a very great benefit to the community, as well as to the individuals themselves and their immediate families, if future criminal activity can be avoided. It is important that this court, by its own sentencing decisions, recognise and reward efforts of rehabilitation just as we should support trial judges who do so. It is important to reinforce in the public mind the very considerable public interest in the rehabilitation of offenders. The preoccupation with retribution which characterises much of the public comment on sentencing is understandable, but it focuses on only one part of what the sentencing does.'[13]
[13] Ibid [49].
50
During this period of delay, you have taken up work as a unit billet at
Port Phillip and have commenced a buprenorphine program to combat your drug addiction. I have taken into account the rehabilitative effects of this delay and I have ameliorated your sentence accordingly.
51 A number of victim impact statements were tendered at your plea hearing. I shall summarise these statements.
52 Eden Parker, the deceased's seven-year-old stepdaughter, refers to Matthew Weegink as 'Dad'. She writes that she loves him very much and just wants him to come home again. When asked what she misses most about her stepfather she writes that, 'He is not here with me and all I want is him back'. She also writes tickle fights, him being my dad and family cuddles. Her favourite memories of her dad are when the family went to the circus, laughing every day and other memories. She also writes she misses being allowed to live with her mum which has not been the case since her stepfather died.
53 Dwayne Weegink, the deceased's older brother, writes that not a day goes by that does not end with a tear. Every motorbike that passes makes his heart stop and brings a sickening feeling. He calls Matthew 'my friend, my pal, my brother'.
54 Denise Weegink, the deceased's mother, writes about a day no mother should ever have to endure. She describes Matthew as being her baby boy, but also a man in his prime, full of vitality, infectiously happy, and a loving father to Eden. She also writes about the knock-on effect of Matthew's death, whereby Morgan Parker lost custody of Eden. As a result, Denise has lost contact with Eden as well, whom she describes as her granddaughter. She writes of how every time she is making a meal, she still expects Matthew's arm to reach over and grab some food too soon. She describes this as a looming shadow, ultimately leaving sadness and emptiness.
55 Ebony Weegink, the deceased's sister, writes of how she was in hospital when she heard the devastating news of her brother's death. She writes:
'Someone has left my brother on the road. They didn't try to help. Just left him there. My heart broke instantly. I was hurting. I was angry. All the emotions running through my body.'
56 She writes of Matthew having the biggest heart and the most infectious smile.
57 Jason Weegink, another brother of the deceased, calls Matthew his best friend. He writes:
'How do you accept him being left there? I just can't understand how one can do that.'
58 He writes that he would do anything to have his brother back.
59 Morgan Parker, the deceased's partner, writes of how Matthew and she moved in together in 2019 and how they made a happy family between the two of them and Morgan's daughter Eden. She and Matthew were dreaming of getting married. With Matthew's death she writes about how she has lost everything and has lost herself. She writes about how she could not afford rent without Matthew and so had to move, and then she could not even afford the next home and now she is homeless. She writes that because of matters caused by Matthew's death Child Protection Services came back and took custody of her daughter Eden. She writes:
'I struggle to understand a person who gets out of the car to see the damage and not even check the person is still alive. What if Matt had still been alive? These are the thoughts that go through my mind and that I can't reconcile.'
60 Tasha Jones, an older sister of the deceased, writes of how she instantly fell in love with Matthew when he was brought home and of how she raised him while her mum and stepfather worked. She writes:
'Matthew died alone without any family around him and there are no words in this world that can describe how that makes me feel.'
61 Michael Weegink, the deceased's father, writes of how he awoke on the day of Matthew's death to the sound of helicopters and sirens. He did not think anything of it until the police officer called to give him the news. He writes:
'The actions of the accused have angered me. The thought of my son lying on the road helpless, dying, as the accused was able to get a look, then to drive off, leaving Matthew behind. How am I as a father meant to be able to accept that?'
62 Ebony Weegink, the deceased's sister, read aloud in court the statements provided by Denise, Michael, Dwayne and Jason Weegink, as well as her own.
63 These victim impact statements describe the devastating effect of losing Matthew Weegink who played a central role in this family and was loved fiercely by those who described the unabating pain of his loss.
64
I must state again, Mr Knight, that you are not be sentenced for causing
Mr Weegink's death. To the extent that these statements speak of the impact caused by Mr Weegink's death, I need to be careful to distinguish this loss from the specific impact upon their grief of knowing that you did not assist
Mr Weegink as he lay dead or dying. It is that latter specific impact that I can use in sentencing you.
65 Some of the Weegink family's statements describe the pain, grief and disgust associated with knowing that their family member was left by the roadside without your assistance. To lose a loved one is painful enough. To know that that loved one spent his last moments dying beside the road whilst you left him and drove away without assisting has added an immense burden of suffering and helpless anger.
66 The report from Corrections Victoria dated 11 April 2023 assesses you as suitable for a community correction order and it recommends conditions of unpaid community work, treatment and rehabilitation for mental health and drug use, and supervision.
67 I have had regard to current sentencing practices in sentencing you as reflected in cases such as Neskovski v The Queen,[14] Al-Anwiya v The Queen[15] and Panourakis v The Queen.[16] Each case is different, and I note in your case that there is no allegation that the quality of your driving caused or contributed to the collision.
[14]Neskovski v The Queen [2022] VSCA 86.
[15]Al-Anwiya v The Queen [2022] VSCA 181.
[16]Panourakis v The Queen [2021] VSCA 259.
Sentence
68 Mr Knight, I am now going to proceed to sentence. Just listen for the moment. What I am proposing to do at this stage, Mr Knight, is to impose a term of imprisonment and thereafter to impose a community corrections order in relation to Charge 1. So I intend to record a conviction and place you on a community corrections order for a period of two years from the date of your release from custody. Do you understand?
69 OFFENDER: Yes.
70 HIS HONOUR: Before I ask you to consent to such an order being made, I have to tell you a little bit about the order so that you know what it means. The following core conditions apply to all community correction orders: you must not commit, whether in or outside Victoria, during the period of the order, an offence punishable by imprisonment. Do you understand that?
71 OFFENDER: Yes.
72 HIS HONOUR: You must report to and receive visits from the Secretary to the Department of Justice, or his or her nominee, during the period of the order. Do you understand that?
73 OFFENDER: Yes.
74 HIS HONOUR: You must report to the Community Corrections Centre at Bendigo within two clear days following your release from custody. Do you understand?
75 OFFENDER: Yes.
76 HIS HONOUR: You must notify the Secretary, or his or her nominee, of any change of address or employment within two clear working days after that change. Do you understand?
77 OFFENDER: Yes.
78 HIS HONOUR: You must not leave Victoria except with the permission of the Secretary to the Department of Justice or his or her nominee. Do you understand?
79 OFFENDER: Yes.
80 HIS HONOUR: You must comply with any direction given by the Secretary that is necessary for the Secretary to give to ensure you comply with the order. Do you understand?
81 OFFENDER: Yes.
82 HIS HONOUR: There are a number of other conditions attached to this order and they also apply to you. I will go through them now:
(a) You have to perform 400 hours of unpaid community work over a period of two years as directed by the Regional Manager. 200 hours of treatment and rehabilitation satisfactorily undertaken are to be counted as hours of unpaid community work for the purposes of the unpaid community work conditions.
(b) You must be under the supervision of a Community Corrections officer for a period of two years.
(c) You are required to be supervised, monitored and managed as directed by the Secretary or his or her nominee.
(d) You have to undergo assessment and treatment, including testing, for drug abuse or dependency as directed by the Regional Manager.
(e) You must undergo any medical assessment and treatment that may include general or specialist medical treatment or treatment in a hospital or residential facility as directed by the Regional Manager.
(f) You must undergo mental health assessment and treatment, including but not limited to mental health, psychological, neuropsychological and psychiatric treatment in a hospital or residential facility as directed by the Regional Manager.
(g) You must undergo programs or courses aimed at addressing factors relating to the offending as directed by the Regional Manager.
(h) You must attend for review of your progress and compliance or otherwise with the conditions of the order and you have got to come back before me on Tuesday 18 July at 9.30 am. Do you understand?
83 OFFENDER: Yes.
84 HIS HONOUR: I direct that I be advised by your Corrections officer of any non‑compliance of these conditions and I will then determine if the matter should be brought back before me.
85 Now, I can only impose a community correction order if you agree to such an order being imposed. So I need to tell you just a little bit more about it. I should advise you that if you contravene, breach or break that order by committing further offences you can be charged and a sentence of imprisonment is one of the options that can be imposed for that breach. Do you understand?
86 OFFENDER: Yes.
87 HIS HONOUR: You can also be resentenced for the offences before me. One of the options available, includes a term of imprisonment. In other words, you need to be extra careful for the next 24 plus months by committing any further offences that might incur a term of imprisonment. Otherwise you are back before this court and you will be resentenced on these charges that are before me.
88 I also advise you that if you fail to comply with any direction of the Secretary to the Department of Justice, that is a Community Corrections officer or worker, as part of this order, a substantial fine can be imposed. Are you aware of all of that?
89 OFFENDER: Yes.
90 HIS HONOUR: Do you consent to being placed on a community correction order?
91 OFFENDER: Yes.
92 HIS HONOUR: Very well. I will ask you to stand now, Mr Knight.
93 On Charge 1, failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident resulting in death, you are convicted and sentenced to 22 months gaol, to be followed upon your release by a community correction order of two years.
94 On Charge 2, handling stolen goods, you are convicted and sentenced to four months gaol to be served concurrently with the sentence on Charge 1.
95
On Summary Charge 4, driving whilst disqualified, you are sentenced to
12 months gaol to be served concurrently with the sentence in Charge 1.
96 On Summary Charge 5, use of an unregistered motor vehicle on a highway, you are convicted and discharged.
97 On Summary Charge 13, possession of ammunition without a licence, you are convicted and discharged.
98 On Summary Charge 14, possession of a prohibited weapon without an exception or approval, you and convicted and discharged.
99 Pursuant to s 61(6)(a) of the Road Safety Act 1986 I order that due to your conviction on Charge 1, your existing driver's licence be cancelled and I disqualify you from obtaining a driver's licence for a period of four years commencing from today.
100 A disposal order and three confiscation orders were sought by the prosecution and I understand that these orders were not opposed and I make those orders.
101 Pursuant to s 18(4) of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that you have spent 562 days in custody by way of pre‑sentence detention to be reckoned as time served.
102 Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I declare that but for your pleas of guilty I would have imposed a sentence of three and a half years with a non‑parole period of two years.
103 Any other orders, Mr Lewis?
104 MR LEWIS: No, Your Honour.
105 HIS HONOUR: Very well.
- - -
10
0