Director of Public Prosecutions v Stefanovski
[2012] VCC 1012
•19 July 2012
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA | Revised (Not) Restricted Suitable for Publication |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Case No. CR-08-00476
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| ROBERT STEFANOVSKI |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE LECKIE | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 19 July 2012 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 19 July 2012 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Stefanovski | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2019] VCC 1012 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Catchwords: Breach of suspended sentence
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | MS S. KAVANAGH | DPP |
| For the Accused | MR P. GUGGENHEIMER |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Pursuant to sub-section 31(5) of the Sentencing Act (1991) I am satisfied that Mr Stefanovski has been found guilty of an offence punishable by imprisonment committed during the operational period of a suspended sentence that I imposed on 11 May 2009, in which I imposed a 12 month sentence but suspended it for two years. Taking into account sub-section (5) and sub-section (5A), I am of the view that it is appropriate to restore the whole of that sentence, particularly in light of the fact that there are no exceptional circumstances that have arisen since the order suspending the sentence was made. However, pursuant to sub-section 31(6) of the Act, which states that:
“If a court orders an offender to serve a term of imprisonment that had been held in suspense, the term must be served, (a) immediately, and (b) unless the court otherwise orders, cumulatively, on any other term of imprisonment previously imposed on the offender by that or any other court”.
2 In light of the principles that are set out in the decision which was referred to by the learned prosecutor, R v Aleksov [2003] VSCA 44, which indicate that the court has a discretion to order part concurrency and that the principles of totality should be taken into account, I am of the view that it is appropriate to order that six months of the 12 months sentence that I am reimposing be served concurrently with the sentence he is presently undergoing, which effectively means that he will do six months on top. Pursuant to the order of sentences set out in the Sentencing Act, I believe that this sentence will have to be served first and then his minimum term will be reinstated.
3 That is my understanding of the provisions and that is my intent, so if there is any dispute about that, if administratively it turns out I am wrong, I would give the parties leave to have the matter mentioned before me again to adjust the matter. It may be able to be done in chambers if there is some problem, but my intent is that he do an extra six months not the whole 12 months.
4 MR GUGGENHEIMER: As Your Honour pleases.
5 MS KAVANAGH: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 HIS HONOUR: Any other matters I need to deal with as far as this case is concerned?
7 MR GUGGENHEIMER: I don't believe so, Your Honour.
8 MS KAVANAGH: No, Your Honour.
9 HIS HONOUR: Would you remove the prisoner, please. Thank you.
10 HIS HONOUR: Do counsel wish to be excused?
11 COUNSEL: Yes please, Your Honour.
12 HIS HONOUR: Thank you, for your assistance. I will excuse you both.
- - -
0