Director of Public Prosecutions v Naidu

[2025] VCC 1416

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

 Revised
Not Restricted
 Suitable for Publication

Case No. CR-25-00466
Indictment No. Q12049701

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

SHAMIT NAIDU

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE CANNON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	29 August 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	25 September 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Naidu
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 1416

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:              Sentence – Pleas of guilty – Indictable offences – Traffick drug of dependence – Negligently deal with proceeds of crime – Resist emergency worker on duty – Summary offences – Deal with property suspected of being proceeds of crime (2) – Relevant criminal history - Offending not sophisticated - History of drug abuse – Trafficking both to support drug habit and for financial gain -  Expert opinion – Disadvantaged childhood - Underlying psychological vulnerabilities rooted in disruptive childhood – Contributed to maladaptive coping style of avoidance, withdrawal and substance dependence - Unable to accept to requisite standard relevant connection between impairment of mental function and offending - Diagnosis taken into account in a general way – Self-medicating for longstanding symptoms at time of offending.- Limbs 1, 3 and 4 Verdins not made out

Sentence: Convicted and sentence to Total Effective Sentence of 3 years’ imprisonment – 250 days’ imprisonment declared as having already been served – s.6AAA Sentencing Act1991 (Vic) declaration

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Mr P. Russell	Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms N. Freijah (Plea) Ms S. Grant (Sentence)	Emma Turnbull Lawyers

HER HONOUR:

1Shamit Naidu, you have pleaded guilty to the following charges on the Indictment:

2Charge 1 – trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely Methamphetamine, which has a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment.

3Charge 2 – negligently dealing with proceeds of crime - which has a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment.

4Charge 3 – resisting an emergency worker whilst on duty – this has a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment.

5Also, you have pleaded guilty to two related Summary Offences, namely two charges of dealing with property suspected to be proceeds of crime being Summary Charges 6 and 7.  The maximum penalty for this offence is two years' imprisonment.

6At the time of the offending you were 29 years old and you are now 30.

7You were unemployed and living with your father in Cranbourne South.

8On 10 July 2024, the Dandenong Magistrates' Court sentenced you to an aggregate sentence of two years' imprisonment but ordered that you serve the sentence by way of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order ('Drug Treatment Order').

9The Drug Treatment Order included a number of conditions, one of which was a requirement that you attend the Drug Court when required to do so.

10On Tuesday 24 September 2024 you drove a Toyota Landcruiser to a parking spot opposite the Drug Court in Mason Street.

11You then went into Drug Court to attend for a required appointment there.

12Police noticed the car that you drove as they were driving by, as it had been referred to in a police circular the previous day.  After conducting a registration check they approached the car.  The car had false registration plates on it and upon further inspection they noticed the vehicle identification number had been partially covered.  The police ascertained that the car was associated with you.  The officers obtained a photograph of you from the relevant database and after viewing CCTV at the Drug Court, established that you were there.  They then saw you leaving the Drug Court building and you walked north along Mason Street, leaving the car you had driven in, which the police were standing around it.

13Police then commenced a patrol of the area to locate you and they did so at about 12.40 pm.  You were sitting at a bus stop on Mason Street, a short distance from the Drug Court.

14A short time after this, four police officers got out of a marked police car and approached you.  You appeared to be using your mobile phone.  One of the officers asked you to end the call and put the phone down, however, you did not comply with the request.

15Police then tried to arrest you but you resisted.  You refused to comply with their directions – instead you were kicking and thrashing out at police, making it difficult for them to handcuff you.  To subdue you, police decided to deploy capsicum spray, which was effective in subduing you.  You were then placed under arrest.

16During the arrest, police found a key to the Landcruiser in your pocket.  You had been reaching for the pocket as you were being restrained, seemingly in an attempt to grab hold of the key.

17Police returned to the Landcruiser and unlocked the car.  They then conducted a search.

18Police confirmed that the Landcruiser was registered in New South Wales.  The registration plates on the car were confirmed to be false and enquiries revealed that the car was obtained by deception as part of a scheme involving fraudulent motor finance applications.  The scheme operated in New South Wales.  There was no suggestion that you were part of the scheme, however.

19The following items were found in the car:

i.a note book containing documents in your name;

ii.a portable scale;

iii.three Ziploc bags containing a white crystal-like substance, one of which contained Methamphetamine with a weight of 22.9 grams and one of which contained Methamphetamine with a weight of 114 grams;

iv.a number of smaller empty Ziploc bags;

v.cash totalling $2,500;

vi.a glass smoking pipe; and

vii.two identification documents and seven bankcards belonging to other people.

20Later that day, police executed a Search Warrant at your address in Cranbourne South.  A number of items were seized and analysed.  However, no items of evidentiary value were found.

21Whilst the car was being searched, you were taken to the Dandenong police station and you took part in a Record of Interview.

22You made 'no comment' answers to a majority of the questions put to you.  You did not make any relevant admissions about drug related offending although you denied any association with the Landcruiser saying 'I don’t know this white car'.

23However, you made several statements about your background and the circumstances of your arrest, including the following:

a)    You said that you were in Drug Court at the moment undertaking a drug rehabilitation program.  You said you had an appointment at the Drug Court that morning and you were meant to go in front of the Magistrates' Court after the appointment for a check in.

b)    When asked about the arrival of a marked police car while you were sitting at the bus stop, you said that you did not hear police identify themselves as police because you were on the phone.  You said:

I did not see a police car.  I was on the phone, and I was looking different direction, and then as I look, I just seen four people jumping on me, so I don't know – what would you do?  What would you have done if you just – you were sitting at the bus stop whatever on the phone – you're not even looking in the direction.  I'm looking in this direction right now and then I just see something, and then I look, and there's four people about to jump me.

24After the Record of Interview you were charged and remanded in custody.

25The crystal-like substance found in your car was analysed by Forensic Services and confirmed to be Methamphetamine.

26The total mixed quantity of the substance, when the two Ziploc bags containing Methamphetamine were combined was 136.9 grams, with the total pure quantity of Methamphetamine within the substance being 68 grams.

27The charge of trafficking Methamphetamine is put on the basis that you were in possession of a traffickable quantity of the drug, as well as items associated with drug trafficking such as cash, scales and Ziploc bags.

28The threshold for traffickable quantity is 3 grams; the threshold for a commercial quantity is 50 grams pure or 250 grams in a mixture.

29The basis for Charge 2 is in relation to the Landcruiser which you were in possession of.

30The basis for Charge 3 is the resisted arrest at the bus stop. In this regard, I have borne in mind that this offence was made out on the basis of recklessness rather than intentional resistance on your part.  The prosecution accepted that this was the case as you gave an account in the Record of Interview about this which was consistent with other evidence, insofar as being apprehended by the police officers was concerned.

31Summary Charges 6 and 7 relate to the bankcards and two drivers' licenses found in your possession.

32Mr Naidu, overall, your offending is serious and deserving of a punishment which is just in all the relevant circumstances.  Your conduct must be appropriately denounced. This is particularly so in respect of the trafficking charge.

33Objectively, your conduct is serious because of the fact that you were already subject to a Drug and Treatment Order when you committed the offences for which I now sentence you.  In particular, the circumstances giving rise (in part) to that Drug Treatment Order were all most similar to the drug trafficking charge for which I now sentence you.  It is indeed breathtaking that you thought it appropriate to drive a car which was clearly not yours with false registration plates to a Drug Court appointment with that car containing a significant quantity of Methamphetamine and other accoutrements of trafficking. 

34The quantity of Methamphetamine is significant with the mixed quantity being 54 per cent of the threshold for a commercial quantity of the drug in a mixed form, and 1.36 times the threshold for a commercial quantity of the drug in a pure form.

35It is 45.5 times the threshold for a traffickable quantity.

36Although the Methamphetamine that you were in possession of amounts to a commercial quantity, you are not to be sentenced for the more serious offence and I make it clear that I have not done so.  However, the quantity is significant and in all the circumstances I regard the trafficking as quite a serious example of trafficking simpliciter.

37You were in possession of the Methamphetamine for sale, prepared to sell to others a substance that is a scourge on our community, and to which you yourself were addicted.

38I accept that the offending was not sophisticated.

39I note that you were also in possession of $2,500 cash which suggests that although you were also a drug user, you were apparently not living hand to mouth in order to feed your habit.

40It is evident that you did have a drug addiction yourself and I accept that at least part of your motivation was to support your own habit – this is not a mitigating feature but something that I take into account when assessing your overall moral culpability.  In this regard, I find that your moral culpability is high, however, it would have been even higher had you not been addicted to Methamphetamine yourself.

41I accept that a major motivation in trafficking the Methamphetamine was in order to feed your own addiction, however, it was also for a level of financial gain.  Having said this, there is no evidence that you were leading a lavish lifestyle and in all the relevant circumstances it seems that you were dealing drugs at street level in a fairly unsophisticated fashion.

42In sentencing you I take into account your criminal history which is most relevant and concerning.

43As the learned prosecutor set out in his written submissions, your criminal history includes the following:

a)    On 16 February 2016, in the Magistrates' Court you received a combination sentence of two months' imprisonment and a community corrections order for 12 months in respect of offences that included trafficking Methamphetamine, possessing Methamphetamine and dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime.  There were a number of conditions attached to the community corrections order including assessment and treatment and rehabilitation conditions in respect of your mental health and drug addiction.  Unfortunately, you breached the community corrections order on four occasions.

b)    On 30 January 2017, in the Magistrates’ Court you were sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 240 days' imprisonment in respect of convictions for offences including trafficking Methamphetamine, possessing Methamphetamine, possessing GHB, committing an indictable offence whilst on bail and resisting a police officer.

c)    On 13 September 2019, in the County Court, you were sentenced by Her Honour, Judge Hannan (as she then was) to a total effective sentence of two years and six months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months for trafficking Methamphetamine.

d)    On 7 October 2021, you were sentenced in the Magistrates' Court to an aggregate term of 45 days' imprisonment for offences including possessing Methamphetamine, possessing GHB, committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, contravening a conduct condition whilst on bail and dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime.

e)    On 7 July 2022, in the Magistrates' Court you were convicted and sentenced to an adjourned undertaking for offences which included possessing Methamphetamine and dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime.  The undertaking included a condition requiring you to attend upon a general practitioner in relation to a mental health care plan and to follow all lawful directions and referrals for treatment for mental health and drug addiction.

f)     On 10 July 2024, you were sentenced in the Magistrates' Court Drug Court to be sentenced for a range of offences including possessing Heroin, possessing Methamphetamine, possessing Amphetamine, possessing 1,4-Butanediol, Ecstasy, Cannabis, LSD, and an unnamed prescription drug as well as retaining stolen goods, using a false document, theft of a motor vehicle, failing to comply with a direction to assist, failing to answer bail, and negligently dealing with the proceeds of crime.  I was provided with a summary in relation to some of this offending, in fact all of the offending ultimately, but in relation to some of it, as these were consolidated matters, one of those offences which occurred, occurred on 24 October 2022, involved police observing two cars, each of which had false registration plates and you were in one of those cars.  The car that you were in was a stolen vehicle.  Upon apprehending you, some of the substances to which I have referred were found in your possession. As I understand it, other of the substances were found in your possession on 5 September 2023.

44In sentencing you, however, I do not do so on the basis that in the case before me or in the previous matter to which I have just referred, you were aware that the registration plates on the car you were driving were false, as you have not been dealt with in relation to this aspect.

45I understand that the Drug Court Treatment Order to which you were subject at the time of the current offending was cancelled on 6 August 2025 and you were sentenced to 263 days' imprisonment from that date.  Your current sentence end date is 25 April 2026.  This is relevant to my consideration of totality and the application of that principle.  Also, I was told that originally you were arrested and remanded in custody on the day of the offending for which I now sentence you, being 24 September 2024.  You were then bailed to 'The Cottage' Residential Rehabilitation Centre on 20 March 2025.  Subsequently, your bail was revoked on 19 May 2025 and the Drug Court sentenced you to seven days' gaol as at that time as a sanction.  This is also relevant to my consideration of totality.

46As at the Plea Hearing date being 29 August this year you had 254 days of presentence detention.

47There has been no further offending since 24 September last year.  I shall return to your progress at The Cottage residential facility in due course.

48I take into account your background as follows:

49You are now 30 years old.

50You migrated to Australia when you were 11, arriving here with your family.  You are a permanent resident.

51You grew up in a close-knit Indian Hindu community and you have strong family and cultural ties.

52Unfortunately, you were subjected to significant family dysfunction, particularly your father's alcohol abuse. He was violent towards your mother and towards you.

53Further, you experienced a deal of trauma when you were nine due to the death of your grandfather, with whom you were very close.

54Upon arriving in Australia, you were met with cultural dislocation and bullying and you struggled to make friends and adapt socially here.

55When you were 16 years old whilst working at KFC you suffered a back injury and you have ongoing back pain and posture issues. 

56To your credit, you completed education to Year 12 level and in 2015, you completed a Certificate III in Automotive Electrical Technology. 

572015 was also the year that you started to use Methamphetamine, after some personal and professional setbacks, with your addiction escalating quickly.  You also used MDMA, Cocaine, GHB and Benzodiazepines.

58You have suffered from depression since 2015 which I understand has been compounded by the breakdown of various relationships, as well as trauma and drug use.

59I understand that whilst you were in prison on an occasion, you witnessed a suicide.  You attempted to resuscitate a friend who overdosed in 2017.

60I was also told that you successfully challenged the mandatory cancellation of your visa in 2020 which was triggered as a result of past sentences imposed.

61In 2021, you suffered serious injury to your wrist as the result of a motorcycle accident.  You required plates and screws to be surgically inserted, and you have ongoing mobility limitations.

62Around the time of your most recent arrest, you reported hallucinations and suffered a psychiatric breakdown, leading to your admission to St Vincent's Hospital.

63I was told that you have been abstinent from drug use since the day of the offending for which I now sentence you and in the past you have been abstinent when in gaol and when in residential rehabilitation – namely, when you were at ‘The Cottage’.

64You have a strong bond with immediate and extended family who remain supportive of you despite your offending history.  In this regard, I have read and taken into account the character references from your parents and siblings, all of whom speak well of you and a number of whom speak of your remorse and reflection upon what you have done whilst in custody.  I see that your parents are again here today in support of you.  I shall return to the question of remorse in due course.

65I understand that as at the time of this offending, you were living with your father, notwithstanding the difficulties you had experienced in the past, and he provided a reference indicating that he was dependent upon you to help him around the house and with various things due to injuries he suffered in a motor vehicle accident.

66A number of the referees also spoke of your battle with mental health and drug issues.

67You rely on the report of Gina Cidoni psychologist dated 1 July 2025 to submit that Verdins principles apply in your case, namely limb 1 and limbs 3 to 6.

68Your counsel at the plea hearing referred to Ms Cidoni's assessment of you on 23 and 26 June this year and her opinion that your offending behaviour occurred in the context of longstanding stimulant dependence and co-occurring mental health conditions.

69The report of Ms Cidoni is somewhat problematic in that you gave an account to her which is not consistent with your plea of guilty to this Court in respect of drug trafficking.  You told Ms Cidoni the drugs found in the car related to your own extensive history of drug use and that you had been holding the substances for a friend whilst using some yourself.

70Despite such an explanation, which is not consistent with you accepting responsibility for trafficking the Methamphetamine found in your car, being in possession of it for sale, and also possessing the accoutrements for the purposes of selling the Methamphetamine, Ms Cidoni went on to refer to your offending behaviour occurring:

In the context of longstanding stimulant dependence and co-occurring mental health conditions that substantially impaired his psychological functioning and capacity for rational decision-making. (Paragraph 87)

71She went on to say that at the time of the index offences you were experiencing a period of destabilisation following a serious motorcycle accident that limited your ability to work and resulted in a return to heavy Methamphetamine use. You reported consuming substances daily from 2021 both as a coping mechanism for emotional distress and physical pain.  She said that your drug use had escalated to the point of dependency and:

The evaluation supports that this was not a matter of intoxication alone but occurred within the context of an established mental disorder characterised by depressive symptoms, post-traumatic intrusions and emotional dysregulation.  These conditions interacted with the effects of the substances to further degrade his reasoning, foresight, and behavioural control.  His actions during the offending appear to reflect impaired judgement and desperation to manage his deteriorating circumstances through drug use and low-level trafficking to sustain that use.

72Ms Cidoni said that the underlying psychological vulnerabilities that shaped your response to stressors are longstanding and rooted in a history of disrupted attachment, childhood exposure to family violence and physical punishment.  She said that these early experiences appear to have contributed to the development of maladaptive coping styles including withdrawal, avoidance and substance dependence which were reinforced over time and intensified in the wake of adult traumas.  She said:

His depressive symptoms, compounded by post-traumatic stress and persistent feelings of guilt and low self-worth, created a psychological state in which he became increasingly detached from social supports, disinhibited in his decision-making, and emotionally overwhelmed.

She said:

When considered together, the situational stressors, impaired mental health, and addiction significantly compromised his ability to exercise sound moral judgement or resist the pressures that culminated in his offending.

73With all due respect to Ms Cidoni I am unable to see the connection between the account you gave her concerning the offending and her findings which assume that you did engage in drug trafficking, contrary to what you told her.

74Your counsel submitted that your conduct on the day of the offending before me ought be understood as being 'an act driven by the combined weight of his addiction and deteriorating mental health'.  (Paragraph 47).

75In the end, I accept that at the time of the offending you were heavily addicted to Methamphetamine with this drug being something you resorted to as a form of self-medication for your mental health issues.  At the time of the offending, you were consuming half a gram to one gram of Methamphetamine per day which is a significant habit and it is evident that you were in the grips of addiction on the day of the offending for which I now sentence you.

76Therefore, in all the relevant circumstances, I am unable to accept the requisite standard that there was a relevant connection between your impairment of mental function and the offending, however, I do take into account in a general way the diagnosis of Ms Cidoni and accept that you were self-medicating for longstanding symptoms as at the time of the offending.  I am not satisfied that any impairment of mental function was operating on you at that time which would warrant reduction in your moral culpability and therefore I am of the view that Verdins limbs 1, 3 and 4 are not made out.

77However, I accept that your ongoing impairment of mental function has and will make time in gaol harder than it would otherwise be and I accept on the basis of Ms Cidoni's report that there is a risk that your mental health may deteriorate.

78In view of matters pertaining to your childhood, I accept that you suffered a disadvantaged upbringing and I apply Bugmy in a general way so as to make less than moderate reduction in your moral culpability and I make commensurate reductions in respect of the weight that I attach to just punishment as well as specific and general deterrence. However, as I have previously indicated, I still find that that your moral culpability is high.

79I allow for a fairly significant discount in the sentence you would otherwise receive because of the stage at which this matter resolved which was one day prior to the contested committal hearing.  While I do not accept that you entered pleas of guilty at the earliest possible opportunity, I do accept that you entered pleas at an early stage, thereby saving the witnesses the time and trouble of giving evidence at committal and trial and saving the community the time and expense of running these proceedings.

80I accept that you are remorseful for your offending insofar as it has impacted upon you and you have been able to express this remorse to members of your family as well as to Ms Cidoni.  As you have been abstinent from drugs you have been able to reflect upon your past offending and you have made positive resolutions about turning things around in the future.  I hope that you do Mr Naidu.

81On the other hand, in view of your offending before me, your criminal history, and the less than frank account that you gave to Ms Cidoni, I do not accept that you have much in the way of insightful remorse insofar as your offending had the capacity to negatively impact upon others in the community.  In the end, I allow for some remorse on your part, however, in my view you have a good way to go in developing heartfelt insightful contrition.

82In sentencing you I take into account that you were a patient at The Cottage residential rehabilitation centre for 58 days.  You were discharged as a result of two episodes of non-compliance with the facility guidelines.  One of these occurred early in the piece where you left the facility to attend St Vincent's Hospital to obtain medication in order to deal with your drug addiction but then returning.  You were not discharged at this stage, however, you were subsequently found to be in possession of two nicotine vapes which resulted in your discharge and, as I understand it, led to bail revocation and your return to remand.  I accept that the time that you spent at The Cottage was of a restrictive nature and I take this into account in keeping with the decision of Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214.

83I have also taken into account in your favour that you progressed well at The Cottage for the 58 days that you were there, as evidenced by the letter from the General Manager of that facility dated 7 July this year.  According to the letter you were making progress in your rehabilitation and recovery and attended regular Narcotics Anonymous meetings.  You were noticeably gaining some awareness around your addiction and gaining tools and techniques to use when you are experiencing emotions or cravings.  You also engaged in daily workshops which were listed in that letter.  Your willingness and commitment to the programs there was noted, and it is most unfortunate that you breached the conditions of attendance which resulted in your discharge.

84It appears that you do have some insight into your substance use and connection between this and your offending behaviour.  You told Ms Cidoni that you were a different person when you were on drugs.  You have also engaged in a number of programs whilst on remand and you are working in prison as a welder, which are matters that I take into account in connection with your prospects of rehabilitation.

85As to the context in which you offended, I have already referred to matters set out by Ms Cidoni in this regard which were relied on by your counsel as well. She referred to your offending occurring during a period of significant personal decline driven by entrenched drug addiction and underlying mental health issues.  She referred to the motorcycle accident in 2021 and the injury you received which required ongoing physiotherapy.  She also referred to your inability to work and suffering persistent physical pain which led you to relapse into daily Methamphetamine use as a way of coping with physical and emotional pain you were experiencing at the time.  She also referred to your drug use escalating into dependency, which was compounded by longstanding mental health conditions, to which I have previously referred.

86In sentencing you I have also had regard to the fact that this was a single date offence and I accept that there was a lack of sophistication about it. It would appear that you were operating on your own at the time and dealing at street level, albeit that the quantity of Methamphetamine was rather substantial.  I have also accepted that there was no sign of you living a lavish lifestyle or of receiving a significant financial reward or that you were involved in large scale sales.  These are not matters in mitigation - they each constitute a lack of an aggravating feature.

87Your counsel submitted that therefore this was an example of trafficking at the lower end of the scale.  In terms of quantity, especially when considering the purity quantity in your possession, I do not accept that this was at the lower end of trafficking simpliciter.  It is also serious because of the context in which you committed the offences, namely whilst you were subject to a Drug Court Order and actually attending Drug Court on the day.  However, there are other matters which are absent, as noted by your counsel.  It is not necessary for me to categorise your offending as your Counsel agitated for. As I have said, I regard it as a rather serious example of trafficking simpliciter.

88In sentencing you I allow for the fact that you face the likelihood of deportation after completing the sentence in this matter.  I accept that the prospect of deportation will make your time in gaol harder than it would otherwise be in circumstances where you have made your home in Australia and all your close family and friendship network is here.  You do not have any meaningful ties to Fiji which is the country you are likely to be removed to.  Only a small number of extended members of your family remain in Fiji and you do not speak the local language or have social or professional connections there; nor, apparently, do you have any viable employment prospects there.  In all the circumstances I accept that there is a likelihood of your deportation which is not only something that would make your time in gaol more burdensome and no doubt has done so, but I also factor in the hardship for you upon completing your sentence because you will likely be deported to a place you do not identify with as your home as well as all the things that come with it, which were set out at the plea hearing.

89In sentencing you I also allow that you have pain from physical injuries to which I have referred which will make time in gaol harder and you have also been subjected to some harsh experiences whilst in custody, again which will no doubt and has no doubt made your time more difficult.

90In view of your ongoing struggles with drug addiction, the offending before me, your criminal history, but also factoring in your more recent progress at The Cottage and whilst in gaol, your family support and the fact that you have some work qualifications, I find that your prospects of rehabilitation are guarded.  I place strong weight on general deterrence in a bid to deter others from offending as you have.  If not for Bugmy, I would have applied even stronger weight to this principle.  I have also made less than moderate reductions in the weight to attach to just punishment and specific deterrence because of Bugmy, which results in me placing fairly strong weight to these.

91I have been referred to various cases in a bid to assist me with current sentencing practice.  I have had regard to current sentencing practice in relation to your offending noting that this is but one consideration and not a controlling one.

92Your counsel submitted that you ought receive a sentence of less than 102 days' imprisonment as this would enable you to avoid mandatory deportation, however, as I told her, I was unable to justify such an approach.

93

The Prosecution submitted that a sentence involving a head sentence with a

non-parole period was appropriate in your case.

94In sentencing you I make it clear that I am most mindful of the principle of totality both in relation to levels of cumulation or otherwise, as between the offences which were all committed on the one occasion. Of course, they are separate instances of offending, but in my view it is appropriate in all of the relevant circumstances to impose total concurrency. 

95I also apply the principle of totality bearing in mind the sentence that you are currently undergoing due to cancellation of the Drug Treatment Order in the Magistrates' Court, as well as the seven days previously imposed.

96As I said previously, I have also taken into account your time at The Cottage.

97Again, I am of the view that the sentence that I impose ought be concurrent with the sentence that you are undergoing, albeit that the sentence that I impose will extend beyond the expiration date for this.

98In my view, nothing short of a head sentence with a non-parole period is appropriate in your case.

99You are convicted of the offences.

100I make the orders for disposal and forfeiture sought by the Prosecution and which are not opposed by you.

101You are sentenced to the following periods of imprisonment:

102Charge 1            3 years

103Charge 2            6 months

104Charge 3            3 months

105Summary Charges 6 and 7:  2 months in respect of each of these.

106I direct that each of these sentences are to be served wholly concurrently with each other, producing a total effective sentence of three years' imprisonment and I direct that this sentence be served concurrently with the sentence you are undergoing. I direct that you serve two years before becoming eligible for parole in relation to the sentence that I have imposed.

107I declare that you have already served 250 days by way of pre-sentence detention.

108If not for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 4 years 6 months with a non-parole period of 3 years 4 months.

109Now, Ms Grant, is there a request by you to have a word with your client over the airwaves once we adjourn, or did you want to do that at another time?

110MS GRANT:  Yes, Your Honour.  I can set up a video conference at a later time.  Thank you.

111HER HONOUR:  At a later time, all right, yes.  Is there anything else arising?

112COUNSEL:  No, Your Honour.

113HER HONOUR:  No, all right.  Yes, thank you, we will adjourn.

- - -