Director of Public Prosecutions v Salievski
[2015] VCC 1071
•12 August 2015
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-14-00882
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| LIRIM SALIEVSKI |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE LEWITAN | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 11 August 2015 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 12 August 2015 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Salievski | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2015] VCC 1071 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject: Possession of Drug of Dependence
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr R. B. Hammill | Greg Hyland Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr A. S. Dickenson | Melasecca, Kelly and Zayler |
HER HONOUR:
1 You, Lirim Salievski, have pleaded guilty before me to one charge of possession of a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine (Charge 1), and one charge of possession of a drug of dependence, namely cannabis (Charge 2). The maximum penalty for Charge 1 is 30 penalty units or imprisonment for one year. The maximum penalty for Charge 2 is five penalty units.
2 On 31 July 2013 the police attended your premises at 47 Keating Crescent at Dandenong South in the state of Victoria. You were in possession of a small bag containing a white powder, which was later analysed by Victoria Police scientist, Jodie Anne Burke, as methylamphetamine.[1] You were also in possession of a small bag containing green vegetable matter, later confirmed by botanist, Susan Elizabeth Fiddian, as cannabis L.[2]
[1] Exhibits C and D.
[2] Exhibits A and B.
3 In relation to Charge 1, the quantity of methylamphetamine found in your possession was 0.4 of a gram. “Small quantity” of methylamphetamine, as defined in Part III of Schedule 11 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, is 0.75 grams.
4 In relation to Charge 2, the quantity of cannabis found in your possession was 0.3 of a gram. “Small quantity” of cannabis, is defined in Part II of in Schedule 11 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, as 50 grams.
5 Your counsel submitted that each of the substances found in your possession was a small percentage of the “small quantity” prescribed by the legislation. Your counsel submitted that each of the drugs found in your possession is a particularly small quantity and consistent with personal use. Your counsel submitted that the objective gravity of each of the offences, the subject of this indictment, is such that a term of imprisonment is not warranted in the circumstances.
6 As has been pointed out by your counsel, you have pleaded guilty. You are entitled to have that fact taken into account in your favour and I do so. The community has, by your plea, been spared the time and cost of a trial. Witnesses have been spared the ordeal of giving evidence upon your trial.
7
You were born on 19 January 1978 and are 37-years-old. You have admitted before me to prior convictions. There are 234 such convictions involving 22 court appearances between 1995 and 2011. The nature of some of those prior convictions, in particular the convictions for possess amphetamine on
26 February 2008, possess cannabis on 27 July 2009 and possess a drug of dependence on 13 December 2011, are such that they are highly relevant to my task of sentencing you today.
8 No evidence has been lead to suggest that you have taken steps towards rehabilitation. In fixing an appropriate sentence, however, I must seek to maximize such chances of your rehabilitation as there may be.
9 You have been remanded in custody in relation to unrelated matters. Your counsel advised the court that you are on bail in respect of these matters. You have served a period of imprisonment of 293 days in relation to the charges on this indictment and other matters which have now fallen away. I accept your counsel's submission that if you are not sentenced to a term of imprisonment, you are not entitled to a declaration of pre-sentence detention.
10 As well as those matters personal to you, I must also take into account such matters as deterrence, especially general deterrence, which is important in a case such as this. I must also consider the likelihood of your re-offending. I am called upon by the Sentencing Act 1991 to manifest the community's denunciation of your conduct and generally to impose a just punishment.
11 I accept your counsel’s submission that, although you are not entitled to a declaration of pre-sentence detention, the period of time you have served in custody should be taken into account in your favour. I have taken into account the period of time which you have spent in custody in relation to these matters in determining an appropriate sentence.
12 I propose to record convictions on each of the charges and direct that you be fined $ 700 in relation to Charge 1 and $ 100 in relation to Charge 2.
13 Do you require time to pay, Mr Dickenson?
14 MR DICKENSON: Some time will be required, Your Honour. Perhaps if I can seek some instructions from counsel?
15 HER HONOUR: Yes, thank you.
16 MR DICKENSON: Would Your Honour consider three months in respect of payment of those fines?
17 HER HONOUR: Any opposition to that?
18 MR HAMMILL: No, Your Honour.
19 HER HONOUR: I allow a stay of 90 days from this date.
20 Lastly I order that the property referred to in the schedule of the disposal order which I have signed this day be forfeited to the state and direct it be placed in the custody of the Chief Commissioner of Police and held by him until 28 days from this date, or the conclusion of any appeal proceedings, and then destroyed.
21 I'll hand down the disposal order. Are there any further matters?
22 MR HAMMILL: No, Your Honour.
23 HER HONOUR: Mr Dickenson?
24 MR DICKENSON: No, Your Honour. I apologise, one other - I can approach my client. I think he had something he wished to instruct me on, Your Honour. Thank you, Your Honour, for that. There's nothing further.
25 HER HONOUR: Thank you. Could you please take Mr Salievski into custody? I'll leave the Bench.
---
0
0
0