Director of Public Prosecutions v Stallion, Claude

[2012] VCC 1502

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

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Case No. CR-11-01970

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

CLAUDE STALLION

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE MASON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	21 August & 13 September 2012
DATE OF SENTENCE:	18 September 2012
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Stallion, Claude
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2012] VCC 1502

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Catchwords: Plea - sentencing - aggravated burglary - robbery

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown at hearing For the Crown at sentence	Mr P. Triandos Ms J. Cavka	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr P. Marin	Valos Black & Associates

HIS HONOUR:

1       

Mr Stallion, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of aggravated burglary and one charge of robbery.  Aggravated burglary carries a maximum penalty of

25 years' imprisonment.  Robbery carries a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment. 

2       The circumstances of the offending are as follows. 

3       Between 12 am and 12.30 am on 10 March 2011 Steven Lazos was sitting on his bed in Room 1 at 4 Aumann Street, Heathmont, a residential boarding house. 

4       

His door was half open when Irene Anastasiadis, known to Mr Lazos, walked past his room and asked him about some of the other residents. 

Ms Anastasiadis then walked away. 

5       You, Mr Stallion, were known to Mr Lazos as the boyfriend of Ms Anastasiadis at the time.  A short time after she had walked away, you pushed Mr Lazos' door fully open and walked into his room. 

6       You approached Mr Lazos, who was still sitting on his bed, and pushed him backwards, causing his head to break part of the plaster wall. 

7       You demanded that he give you his jewellery.  Mr Lazos unclipped a gold bracelet from each of his wrists and handed them to you.  You tried to unclip a gold necklace with a gold crucifix from around his neck.  He took it off over his head and handed it to you. 

8       You then took his mobile phone from a dressing table beside his bed, but allowed him to take out the SIM card. 

9       You told Mr Lazos not to make any noise.  You left with the jewellery and phone and went out the front door. 

10      Mr Lazos called ‘000’, and police arrived a short time later and located a number of items in the garden at the front of the house. 

11      Police arrested you on 12 March 2011 and seized a black bum-bag from you.  You made a "no comment" record of interview at Maroondah Criminal Investigation Unit.

12      You were committed for trial following a contested committal on 20 October 2011 and entered a plea of not guilty.  The matter was listed for trial on 20 August 2012 in respect of Indictment B10661852 but resolved to a plea of guilty to this indictment on that date.

13      A victim impact statement from Mr Lazos was tendered on your plea.  In it the victim expresses the understandable emotional impact of your offending as well as the physical loss of his possessions.

14      You were arrested on 12 March 2011, as I have previously indicated, and remanded in custody. 

15      On 18 May 2011 you were sentenced at the Ringwood Magistrates' Court on other matters to a total effective sentence of one year and three months’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of eight months.  Pre-sentence detention of 28 days was declared.

16      On 3 August 2011 your parole was cancelled and you were required to service six months owed to the Parole Board in respect of sentences imposed on 15 December 2008 and 25 March 2009. 

17      On 16 November 2011 parole was denied at your request.  Your expected release date is currently 20 January 2013.  The pre-sentence detention referable to this indictment is 40 days, which is from 12 March 2011 to 20 April 2011 inclusive. 

18      I now turn to your personal circumstances.

19      You are now aged 32, having been born on 23 June 1980, and you were 30 at the time of offending. 

20      You have an extensive criminal record, with your many court appearances commencing in the Melbourne Magistrates' Court in July 1997 when you were just 17, on charges of theft, escape from lawful custody and drug offences.  Over the intervening years you have reappeared at the Magistrates' Courts on some 19 occasions and at the County Court on five occasions, two of which were appeals from Magistrates' Courts’ sentences. 

21      Your criminal record reflects a most unfortunate and tragic history.  You have described your father as a drunk and that there was a breakdown in your relationship with him before you could remember.  For practical purposes, you never knew him and appear to have had no positive relationship with him.

22      You were taken from your mother, who is indigenous, at age seven.  Your mother also had an alcohol problem, and you were the last of three siblings to be removed from her care.  You believe Child Protection Services came because there was no food and she could not care for you properly.  You were aged seven at the time and your memory of the events still has an associated sense of trauma.  Essentially thereafter, you were raised in hostels and by foster families.  Your education was poor, only fully completing Year 8.

23      You were introduced to intravenous heroin at age 17 and began a history of using cannabis, amphetamines and illicitly-obtained prescription drugs.  You have an on-and-off heroin habit.  At the very least, you have had a long history of drug abuse for many years going back to your early adolescence. 

24      A report from Mr Michael Crewdson, psychologist and psychotherapist, was tendered on your plea.  In Mr Crewdson's opinion, you suffer from depressed mood, otherwise referred to as dysthymic disorder.  This disorder may emphasise your vulnerability and difficulty in managing active rehabilitation.  You also suffer from anxiety, cognitive difficulties, including problems with concentration, memory and loss of attention. 

25      Your last appearances before the County Court were in October and November 2003.  On the latter of those occasions His Honour Judge Punshon referred to the need to be mindful to avoid further institutionalisation as far as possible. 

26      The offending on the current matters again involved serious offences.  Principles of general and specific deterrence are important, as is the need for denunciation. 

27      You have prior convictions for aggravated burglary, armed robbery, burglary and robbery amongst the various thefts and other offending going back over 14 years. 

28      In mitigation I take into account your plea of guilty and the greater significance of your plea to Charge 1 in the particular circumstances.  There was conflicting evidence, the elements of entry into the room where the victim was is essentially a technical form of that charge and you set aside the option of going to trial.  Your plea has facilitated the course of justice, it saves expense and avoids the necessity of the victim giving evidence and suffering further trauma.  I accept that the nature of the offence of aggravated burglary should be categorised as being at the very low end and its act, involving simply pushing open a partly opened door, is essentially bound with the subsequent act of the robbery.  I accept that you were probably under the influence of some mind-altering drug at the time of your reaction.  That mitigation takes into account the fact that you have a longstanding drug addiction problem which you have wrestled with for many years, not merely the fact that you were drug affected at the time. 

29      I also take into account the matters of your personal background of deprivation, your psychological challenges and the unfortunate history you have had since your early years which have resulted in drug addiction and institutionalisation. 

30      Mr Stallion, could you please now stand.

31      In determining the particular sentences to each charge, I have imposed the higher sentence on Charge 2, notwithstanding that Charge 1 carries the greater maximum penalty.  This is because in the particular circumstances of this case I regard the culpability of your acts on Charge 2 the greater. 

32      In imposing the sentences that I have, I have also deducted an appropriate portion of the sentences I would otherwise have imposed because of the substantial time in custody you have already served without the opportunity for parole whilst awaiting this hearing. 

33      

On Charge 1 of aggravated burglary, you are convicted and sentenced to

12 months' imprisonment. 

34      On Charge 2 of robbery, you are convicted and sentenced to 24 months' imprisonment. 

35      These sentences are to be served concurrently with each other and with any other sentences presently being served. 

36      The total effective sentence is 24 months' imprisonment.

37      I direct you serve a minimum period of 12 months' imprisonment before being eligible for parole. 

38      I declare that the period that you have already spent in custody in this matter, namely 40 days, be reckoned as a period of imprisonment already served under this sentence and is to be deducted administratively.

39 For the purposes of s.6AAA of the Sentencing Act, but for your plea of guilty, and taking into account other time served, the total effective sentence that would have been imposed is three years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 21 months. 

40      At the plea hearing the Crown sought a disposal order which was not opposed, and I have made that order today. 

41      The Crown also sought a compensation order in the sum of $1500 payable to the victim for the loss of his jewellery, which was also not opposed, and I have made that order also today.

42      Are there any other matters from either counsel?

43      MS CAVKA:  No, Your Honour.

44      MR MARIN:  No, Your Honour.

45      HIS HONOUR:  Thank you very much, Mr Marin, for your assistance in this matter.

46      MR MARIN:  Thank you, Your Honour.

47      HIS HONOUR:  And Ms Cavka for attending today. 

- - -