Director of Public Prosecutions v Mutapcic
[2025] VCC 322
•21 March 2025
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CR-23-01822
CR-24-00432
CR-24-00433
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| SANJIN MUTAPCIC NATHAN ASHBY DYLAN STONE |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE MAIDMENT |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
DATE OF HEARING: | Mutapcic & Stone: 11 February & 21 March 2025 |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 21 March 2025 |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Mutapcic & Ors |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2025] VCC 322 |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:Trial – sentencing, plea - sentencing
Catchwords: Traffick in commercial quantity of drug of dependence - handle stolen goods - breach conditions of parole - deal with property suspected of being proceeds of crime - attempt to traffick in commercial quantity of drug of dependence
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:Mutapcic 2 yrs and 3 mths' imprisonment, non-parole period 16 mths
Ashby: 2 yrs and 9 mths' imprisonment, non-parole period 20 mths
Stone: 2 yrs and 3 mths' imprisonment, non-parole period 14 mths---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
For the DPP | Ms G. Overend | Office of Public Prosecutions |
For Accused Mutapcic | Ms S. Seoud | Robinson Gill Lawyers |
For Accused Ashby | Ms E. Byrt | Emma Turnbull Lawyers |
For Accused Stone | Dr M. Gumbleton with | Sara Tricarico Lawyers |
HIS HONOUR:
1Dylan Stone, you have pleaded guilty to two charges on the indictment: Charge 1, trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence on 24 July 2023, and Charge 2, handling stolen goods arising from the discovery of a U-Haul trailer which you have admitted to knowing or believing to be stolen. The maximum term of imprisonment for trafficking in a drug of dependence that is not less than a commercial quantity is imprisonment for 25 years and the maximum penalty for the offence of handling stolen goods is imprisonment for 15 years.
2You have also pleaded guilty to, and asked me to take into account in passing sentence, two related summary offences: Summary Charge 5 of breaching conditions of your parole by committing the offence of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, namely 1,4-Butanediol, for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for three months, and to Summary Charge 8 of dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for two years.
3In your case, Mr Mutapcic, you have pleaded guilty to attempting to traffick in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, for which the maximum penalty is 25 years' imprisonment. And in your case, Mr Ashby, you have pleaded guilty to trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence. I should say that in Mr Mutapcic's case the offending is said to have occurred on one day, being 28 July 2023, and in your case, Mr Ashby, the offending is said to have occurred between 13 May 2023 and 1 August 2023 and the quantity is a commercial quantity for 1,4-Butanediol.
4Each of you has admitted prior convictions. The prosecution tendered as Exhibit A on the plea hearing a summary of prosecution opening dated 6 March 2025 and I incorporate that in these reasons. I am not going to read it again or even summarise it, because it was dealt with in full at today's hearing and anybody who was interested in listening in was able to hear that in full. In relation to each of you, your counsel provided me with written submissions and also assisted me with oral submissions today.
5Those oral submissions dealt with the salient points of the written submissions and drew my attention to many of the details set out in the accompanying exhibits that were relied upon in relation to each of you, including reports from psychologists, neuropsychologists and other professionals, who identified much of your relevant background history and the connection between your background history and your descent into drug abuse, the effect that that drug abuse has had on your life and the influence it has had upon your criminal histories.
6Again, I am not going to dwell on the detail of those. Suffice to say, it is accepted by the prosecution that the Bugmy principles, which arise from childhood deprivation, apply in a general sense to the cases of each of you. They are relevant to mitigation of sentence in that they tend to reduce your moral culpability for your offending and help explain the connection between that background and your drug abuse, and in no small measure to your more extensive criminal history.
7I accept that in each of your cases mental impairments will make it more difficult for you to serve such terms of imprisonment as you still face in relation to this matter after today. I do not think there is any dispute that in that sense Verdins principles apply in reduction of sentence that might otherwise have been appropriate. I accept that there has been delay. That has allowed demonstration of willingness to participate in rehabilitation and points in each of your cases to a willingness to accept criminal responsibility and to endeavour to self-examine the causes of your drug abuse issues and the influence that those habits have had on your capacity to stay out of trouble in the future.
8To varying degrees you have prospects of rehabilitation that range from good to still guarded. But each of you is moving in the right direction in that regard. There is of course some difference in the parts played by each of you in the offending and there is a context of the offending conduct which suggests that the three of you were involved together in a criminal enterprise which involved the trafficking in 1,4-Butanediol.
9However, there are differences between you. In relation to you, Mr Stone, the amount involved, on the one day that it is alleged you were trafficking in a commercial quantity, was about 7.9 kilograms or thereabouts. In your case, Mr Mutapcic, on the day that you are alleged to have attempted to traffick in a commercial quantity of 1,4-Butanediol, the amount involved was 18 kilograms or thereabouts. In your case Mr Ashby, the offending was between dates. In that sense you were engaged in a more extensive period of trafficking with an amount in total of what appears to have been 28 kilograms.
10I have to be a little bit cautious about that because, as the prosecution has pointed out to me, it is possible that there was some duplication in the amounts that go to make up those 28 kilograms. However, it is on the face of it a more serious offence of trafficking than the offences to which Messrs Stone and Mutapcic have pleaded guilty.
11I have to be careful to ensure as far as I can that there is parity of sentencing as between you. Other factors which bear upon the question of an appropriate sentence for each of you are, in your case Mr Ashby, that at the time of offending in this case, you were on parole. As a result of you being arrested, your parole was cancelled and you served out the remaining part of your sentence which concluded a little earlier this year and you are entitled to
204 days of presentence detention, not including today.12Mr Mutapcic, you have been on remand for quite some time and your presentence detention is 602 days. In your case, Mr Stone, you lost your parole and served out a previous sentence which concluded on 17 February of this year. I think I wrongly said in relation to Mr Ashby that his previous sentence which he served out after losing parole finished earlier this year. It actually finished on 28 August of last year, hence the period since, namely
204 days, is time that is reckoned to have been served on the sentence that I am about to impose.13Your pleas of guilty are consistent with remorse. I take that into account and have endeavoured to give proper value to the various submissions that have been made on behalf of each of you. I am not one who is particularly impressed generally by an application for a sentence indication from the court in advance of a plea of guilty. However, I think in this case it has served some useful purpose, whilst one of the reasons I am not a fan of it is that it tends to undermine the degree to which one can discern genuine remorse usually associated with a plea of guilty.
14However, I give you full credit for your pleas of guilty and there are factors in this case which seem to me to justify the application for a sentence indication hearing because the cases involving Mr Mutapcic and Mr Stone were complicated by other sentences. I am doing the best I can to achieve parity of sentence, and to marry up the various sentencing principles which arise generally, and in particular in relation to drug trafficking offences. The community can rightly be concerned about the adequacy of sentences in deterring others from committing offences of that kind, which tend to drag other people into use of drugs which in turn frequently leads them to criminal conduct of the kind demonstrated in the criminal records of each of you.
15There is an element of individual deterrence that needs to be given proper weight, as well as denunciation and just punishment. However, I think that given the indications that I have already referred to, which suggest that each of you in your own way has realised the importance of dealing with your own long-term drug habit and addressing the underlying issues, I have some confidence that the sentences that I am about to impose are not too lenient and are consistent with a desire to promote as far as possible your continued rehabilitation.
16So dealing with each of you in turn, starting with you, Dylan Stone. On Charge 1 of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for two years. On Charge 2 of handling stolen goods, you are convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of nine months. In relation to the related Summary Charge 5 of breaching your terms of parole, you are convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of one month. In relation to Summary Charge 8 of dealing with property suspected of being stolen, you are convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for four months.
17I order that three months of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon the sentence of two years on Charge 1. So the total effective sentence is two years and three months' imprisonment.
18I fix a non-parole period of 14 months.
19I declare presentence detention of 32 days as time to be reckoned as served on the sentence that I have imposed.
20But for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to imprisonment for three years with a non-parole period of two years.
21I make the ancillary orders that have been provided to me in draft form and which I have already signed.
22In your case, Mr Mutapcic, on Charge 1 of attempting to traffick in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for two years and three months.
23I fix a non-parole period of 16 months.
24I declare 602 days as time to be reckoned as served on the sentence that I have imposed.
25But for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to imprisonment for a period of three years with a non-parole period of two years.
26I make the ancillary orders that have been provided to me in your case.
27In relation to you, Mr Ashby, on Charge 1 of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years and nine months.
28I fix a non-parole period of 20 months.
29I declare 204 days as time to be reckoned as served on that sentence.
30But for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to imprisonment for three years and six months with a non-parole period of 28 months.
31I make the ancillary order that I have been provided with in draft and which I have also signed in your case.
32Are there any other matters, counsel, that I have forgotten about?
33DR GUMBLETON: Not for Mr Stone, may it please the court.
34MS BYRT: No.
35MS SEOUD: No, Your Honour.
36HIS HONOUR: Ms Byrt, are you anxious to get to your feet again?
37MS BYRT: No, Your Honour. I just want to note in relation to Mr Ashby – I note that Your Honour corrected it. He wasn't on parole, he just served out his entire sentence that he was sentenced to.
38HIS HONOUR: Yes, maybe I misspoke there.
39MS BYRT: No, that's okay.
40HIS HONOUR: He has served his entire sentence. I should have made that clear. I apologise for that.
41MS BYRT: Thank you, Your Honour.
42HIS HONOUR: Yes. His entire sentence finished on 28 August of last year. That is right is it not?
43MS BYRT: I think that ‑ ‑ ‑
44HIS HONOUR: Therefore, the 204 days since is the time to be reckoned as served.
45MS BYRT: Yes.
46HIS HONOUR: I tried to correct that. I probably did not do it adequately.
47MS BYRT: No, I just wanted to make it clear for the record. Thank you.
48HIS HONOUR: Thank you very much. Yes. Ms Seoud, have I got anything wrong?
49MS SEOUD: No, Your Honour.
50HIS HONOUR: Thank you. That is good. And so Ms Overend, I do not know whether you want the last word. Have I got anything wrong or are you happy with the way I have expressed the sentence?
51MS OVEREND: One moment, Your Honour. That's fine, Your Honour.
52HIS HONOUR: It is all right?
53MS OVEREND: Yes.
- - -
0
0
0