Director of Public Prosecutions v Langstaff

[2015] VCC 68

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

AT LATROBE VALLEY
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR 15-00110

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

BRANDON LANGSTAFF

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE SMALLWOOD
WHERE HELD:	Latrobe Valley
DATE OF HEARING:	30 January 2015
DATE OF SENTENCE:	30 January 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Langstaff
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VCC 68

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr K. Doyle	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr H. Rattray	Emma Turnbull Lawyers

HIS HONOUR:

1Brandon Langstaff, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of criminal damage, one charge of aggravated burglary, one charge of theft, one charge of handling stolen goods and one charge of possessing a drug of dependence.  Those crimes carry maximum penalties of ten years, 25 years, ten years, 15 years and two years respectively.

2You are now only 18 years of age.  You pleaded guilty at the earliest reasonable opportunity and whilst you made denials in respect of the most serious of the offending, you have had the common sense to plead to that and get the matter on at an early date.  Importantly, since the day of the offending, you have been kept in adult custody and I regard that, in your situation, as a significant factor.  I do not really know how much remorse is involved in all of this, but you certainly get the utilitarian benefit of that plea of guilty.

3You do have a number of prior convictions, but you have never before been incarcerated.  Those prior findings of guilt come from around the age of 15 and indeed, this is your first appearance in a court other than the Children's Court.  All those matters I take into account in mitigation.

4Firstly, pursuant to s.464ZF of the Crimes Act, I make an order that you provide a saliva sample for DNA purposes.  That order having been made, I advise that should you refuse to comply with a police request for such a sample, police may use reasonable force to take it from you.  That order is made and handed down.

5The circumstances of the offending can be described in fairly brief compass.  As I had indicated during the course of the plea, it is the charge of aggravated burglary which is the real concern here.  Your counsel had been able to get you a what can be described as a fairly good deal.  It seems to me that there is certainly a charge of armed robbery could have been laid and you are obviously getting the benefit of all that.

6However, you are and were 18 years of age.  Your co-offenders were 25 and 27.  You had been in Adelaide and came back to Victoria around about 13 October.  At that stage, you were back in the Traralgon area and in company with the two co-accused.  By that point in time, you were an Ice user and had been for approximately 12 months.  Your counsel tells me and I accept that your use of Ice had escalated after the death of a close relative.

7In any event, about two days after you got back to Melbourne, some people were asleep in a house in Blair Athol Drive in Traralgon.  They were one Matthew Airey, one Ashley Damburgs and a Nicholas Westwood, who was staying over at that address, sleeping on the couch.

8You and the others arrived at the front of the house.  At least one of you was heard calling out for money and drugs.  Westwood's name was being called out as was Airey's.  Airey did not know how you knew his name.  You all began banging on the front door to the house asking to be led in.  Airey opened the door and saw you with a hockey stick and one of the others holding a metal pole.  He did not know you.  He said he was going to call the police.  Westwood had woke up hearing this noise and went out the back door of the house.  He ran around the side of the house attempting to flee and saw a car parked out the front with its parking lights on.  Apparently one of the three of you was in the driver's seat.  He escaped.  I do not know what Mr Westwood's involvement in all of this was, and I do not propose to speculate.

9Mr Airey tried to shut the front door.  You and probably Mr Stokes began to bash the front door down with your weapons, successfully smashing your way through to the extent that Airey saw the weapons protruding through the door.  That gives rise to criminal damage.

10He ran to his bedroom to call the police.  You all continued shouting you there to get Nick Westwood's money.  Airey said he did not know you and did not know what you were talking about.  Three of your forced your way into the house and that gives rise to aggravated burglary.

11Having seen the photos and the damage to the door and the circumstances of it, it is clearly a, in my view, serious example of aggravated burglary and objectively demands a period and a significant period of custody.

12In any event, from that point on, Mr Airey leant against his bedroom door to try and keep you out of his bedroom.  The bedroom door was struck with weapons and caused damage and he eventually gave in and opened the door.  You then entered the bedroom, confronting him, weapons were pointed at his face.  He was threatened and told to put his phone down.  There were people screaming at him, saying, "Where are the drugs?"  And where the drugs and money were kept.  You picked up his gold coloured Apple iPhone and placed it in your pocket.  One of the other accused said, "Give me your fucking wallet."  He handed over an old wallet containing nothing.  You found his other wallet, car and house keys in his tallboy and placed it in your pockets, thereby stealing those items.  That also includes a laptop, as I understand it, which was taken shortly thereafter.

13You then entered the bedroom where Damburgs was asleep.  He awoke and saw you standing beside his bed.  He recognised you, which means you probably would have been convicted on trial, having known you for a year.  You banged the end of the bed, woke him up and mentioned his name.  You said, "Give me your phone now."  Mr Airey observed you standing over Damburg and threatening him for the phone.  The phone was given to you and you left.

14The three of your then left the room, walked into the kitchen, as I have indicated, took a laptop from the kitchen.  Upon leaving, the words were spoken that, "If you don't find Nick, we'll be back for you."  The stolen credit card was later used at retail outlets in Traralgon and $174 was obtained.

15A day later on 17 October at approximately 2 o'clock in the afternoon, police attended a room at the Strzelecki Motor Lodge and found you inside cutting your hair.  You were arrested by police, they searched the room and found half a gram of methylamphetamine with a set of digital scales, and that is of no significance in this sentencing process.  They also found mobile phones and personal cards in the name of yourself and Alan and driver's licence belonging to a Mr David Warner.  That gives rise to a charge of stolen goods.  That licence had gone missing from his car, apparently, somewhere in February or March.

16You were interviewed at the Morwell police station.  As I said, you admitted to the amphetamine use, denied the aggravated burglary, but subsequently and very sensibly pleaded guilty.

17There is a victim impact statement from Mr Airey, which describes just how terrifying all this must have been and the ongoing psychological damage that he suffered from it.  I have to say to you Mr Langstaff, despite your youth, this is the sort of aggravated burglary that demands a custodial sentence.  As I have indicated, there must be a significant one.

18Whatever the circumstances surrounding all this, I accept that you were either on Ice or coming down from it.  This is the sort of conduct that can end up with dreadful consequences and general deterrence as well, in your case, specific deterrence must play a significant part.  There must also be denunciation and appropriate punishment.

19I now look to matter personal to you.  You are 18 and the submission was that you should be in Youth Justice.  I agree with that entirely.  You have now been assessed for Youth Justice and found to be acceptable.

20A brief synopsis of your life is that you have always resided in La Trobe Valley.  You left school at 13.  You have had ADHD apparently since the age of four.  You say you have never been medicated for that and that has been a real issue for you as long as you can remember.  You left school, as I said, at 13.  You have never had full time employment but have worked sporadically on fishing boats.  You have always resided with your mother and are the youngest in a siblingship of seven.  I have already indicated the trauma to you of the death of a close relative.

21Importantly, you are now the father of a four week old child and that should give you an aim in life and hopefully will assist in your ultimate rehabilitation.  I take into account that you were addicted and under the influence of drugs at the time of all this.  You have indicated to your counsel that you have previously been in trouble with alcohol and your prior history would seem to support anger problems.  As your counsel pointed out in your plea, there were no prior drug convictions.

22The prospects of your rehabilitation are very much in your own hands.  The risk of you reoffending depends upon your rehabilitation.

23I have ameliorated the sentence because of the fact that you have been in adult custody now for a period of time.  I am well aware of the parole provisions that will apply insofar as Youth Justice is concerned and I am sure that your counsel will have explained that to you.

24This is a situation where on your prior convictions and looking at the seriousness of the nature of this offending, whatever is wrong in your life is going to have to get turned around pretty soon.  This is the sort of conduct that could end up, as you heard counsel and myself discussing some Court of Appeal cases where you can get extremely long sentences for this sort of offending.  Were you, for example, say 25 or 26 doing this, you would be getting double at least what I am going to give you.

25In any event, taking all those matters into account and balancing what is serious offending against your youth and your prospects of rehabilitation and also taking into account the principles that have been outlined, as I have indicated, in Boulton, I still think it has to be significant though not crushing.  It will be an aggregate sentence because it is a Youth Justice sentence.

26Accordingly, on all the charges, you are sentenced to be detained in a Youth Justice Centre for a period of 18 months and I direct that 106 days be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.

27Any other orders I have to make?

28MR RATTRAY:  No sir.

29MR DOYLE:  Section 6AAA.

30HIS HONOUR:  Yes.  But for your plea of guilty, I would have given you two years Youth Justice.  Thank you.

‑ ‑ ‑