Director of Public Prosecutions v Patto

[2025] VCC 996

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Revised

Not Restricted

Suitable for Publication

CR 25-00014

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

PETROS PATTO

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE DAVIS
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	14 July 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	14 July 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Patto
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 996

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:  CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:             Theft (2 charges) – Arson (4 charges) – plea of guilty after sentence indication hearing

Legislation Cited:     Crimes Act 1958; Sentencing Act 1991

Sentence:Total effective sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms J. Hotchin	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr A. Maloney	Theo Magazis & Associates

HER HONOUR: 

1Mr Patto, you have pleaded guilty to two charges of theft of motor vehicle, Charges 1 and 4; two charges of arson involving motor vehicles, those are Charges 3 and 6; and two charges of arson involving tobacco business premises, those are Charges 2 and 5. 

2The offending was committed on 12, 15 and 16 May in the company of your then 19-year-old son and co-accused, Josiah Matete, who has recently been sentenced by me in relation to these and other offences.

3You, Mr Patto, were 35 years old at the time of offending.  You had been released from your most recent term of imprisonment on 24 February 2024.  You instructed your lawyer that you had been abstinent from drugs upon your release and offended because your son was in debt and you offended to assist him.

4You have an extensive criminal history relating to your long-standing drug addiction dating back to 2008, when you were sentenced in this court for armed robbery and theft.  You then served multiple terms of imprisonment pursuant to sentence of the Magistrates' Court for drug offences, dishonesty offences, driving offences, weapons offences, and some violent offences, however you have no prior convictions for arson.

5You have also regularly offended while being subject to court orders, bail, corrections orders and so on.

6You have served 423 days of pre-sentence detention not including today and I note whilst on remand you have completed three programs relating to parenting and consequential thinking, and that you provided certificates in relation to those courses today. 

7I also note that you are on the wait list for drug and alcohol treatment courses and that you have been on the methadone program since your remand and you have had at least five or six clean urine screens since that time.

8Your personal circumstances were a little further outlined in your counsel's submissions.  You have supportive parents who tried to help you with your behavioural issues as a teenager but unfortunately you developed a polysubstance abuse problem from the age of 14.  Your parents had resolved to send you to a special school but unfortunately you were remanded into a youth training centre at that time, and you have served much of your life since then on remand or serving custodial sentences.

9When not in custody, you have lived with your parents and it was put on your behalf that notwithstanding your long criminal record, that some comfort should be taken by the long period of abstinence you have had in remand, by the programs that you have completed, and by the drug and alcohol courses which you hope to complete once you are sentenced.

10It was common ground that the objective gravity of the arson offences falls in the mid-range of seriousness for this type of offending, and that your moral culpability for this offending is high.  Arson offending against tobacco stores has become common and is a vice which must be denounced and deterred both specifically and generally.

11Although the prosecution was not able to provide precise dollar values to the damage done, the evidence of the two industrial chemists was to the effect that the two cars were completely destroyed by fire, and that the two shops suffered extensive fire damage.  In addition, there was a risk to safety of persons in that the owner of the shop, the subject of the arson in Charge 5, lived in a residence connected to the rear of the store and was woken once the fire had taken hold.  The aggravating features of your offending included that it was committed in company and that it was clearly planned, premeditated, and deliberate.

12On the other hand it was common ground that there is a significant utilitarian value to the plea being made in this matter, which will be taken to have been made at an early opportunity because it had been flagged since the committal, and that no witnesses have been called or cross-examined into it, as a result of it.

13The serious offender provisions apply to the offence of arson.  This means that if sentenced to a term of imprisonment on Charge 2, you will fall to be sentenced as a serious arson offender on Charges 3, 5 and 6.  In sentencing you as a serious arson offender the court is required to consider the protection of the community as the principal sentencing consideration.  In addition, the terms of imprisonment imposed are to be served cumulatively unless otherwise directed.

14Arson is a serious crime and denunciation and general deterrence remain important sentencing considerations, as well as does specific deterrence and of course proportionality, totality and parsimony remain relevant and I note that in this case no disproportionate sentence has been sought by the prosecution.

15As to your prospects of rehabilitation, the prosecution submits that in the light of your long criminal history and the fact that you offended only a few months after being released from custody on the last occasion, that your prospects of rehabilitation are poor.

16On your behalf it was suggested that you have, at the age of 36, begun to take stock of your life and where you want it to go, and that your abstinence from drugs in custody and for a short period before being remanded, as well as your undertaking of the various courses you have undertaken, is somewhat promising in relation to your ability to not offend in the future.

17The only area really of further contention by your counsel related to the question of the length of the non‑parole period.  It was conceded that the sentence indication meant that the maximum sentence to be imposed was one of five years, but it was submitted that in considering the non-parole period I should bear in mind your prospects of rehabilitation and I suppose in a sense the undesirability of you remaining institutionalised effectively.

18I consider that in the light of your long criminal history and the short gap between your release and your reoffending, in spite of being drug free and clear headed, that your prospects of rehabilitation are very guarded indeed. 

19I accept the factors in mitigation put on your behalf, in particular your plea of guilty and the fact that it has saved the witnesses and the court to need to have a trial.

20I note that you have no priors for the offence of arson.  It is clear from the Crown's opening and from the material before me that Charges 2 and 5 are the most serious aspects of your offending, and that Charge 5 is the more serious because it involved the additional factor of a risk to safety of persons.

21In all the circumstances I have already indicated that I would be imposing a maximum total effective sentence of five years' imprisonment.  In all the circumstances I propose to sentence you as follows.

22On Charge 1, the theft of the car, I sentence you to a term of six months' imprisonment.

23On Charge 2, arson of a business, I sentence you to two years' imprisonment.

24On Charge 3, arson of a car, I sentence you to nine months' imprisonment.

25On Charge 4, theft of a car, I sentence you to six months' imprisonment.

26On Charge 5, arson of a business, I sentence you to three years' imprisonment.

27On Charge 6, arson of a car, I sentence you to nine months' imprisonment.

28I direct that three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 1, as well as three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 3, and three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 4, and three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 6 be served cumulatively on the sentence imposed on Charge 5.  I direct that 12 months of the sentence on Charge 2 be served cumulatively upon the sentence imposed on Charge 5.  I think that comes to a total effective sentence of five years. 

29Notwithstanding the submissions that have been made, I think the appropriate non-parole period is one of three years and I impose that as the non-parole period.

30I declare that the 432 days of pre-sentence detention, not including today, be deducted administratively from the sentence imposed today.

31I indicate pursuant to section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act1991 that but for your plea of guilty I would have imposed a sentence of seven years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of four and a half years.

32As charges 1 and 4 of car theft carry mandatory interference with your driver’s licence, I propose to suspend your licence for a period of three months.

‑ ‑ ‑