R v Michalopoulos

Case [2020] ACTSC 27


SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Michalopoulos

Citation:

[2020] ACTSC 27

Hearing Date:

4 February 2020

DecisionDate:

5 February 2020

Before:

Mossop J

Decision:

See [45]

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and punishment – sentencing – maintaining sexual relationship with young person – contravening a personal protection order – contravening a family violence order – offender and victim engaged in illicit drug use together – considered themselves to be a couple – circumstances made it clear to the offender the victim was under the age of 16 – sentence of imprisonment

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 56(1)

Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), s 108
Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT), ss 7, 35(4), 66
Personal Violence Act 2016 (ACT), s 35

Family Violence Act 2016 (ACT), s 43(2)

Cases Cited:

R v Degioannis [2019] ACTSC 47

R v KN (No 2) [2019] ACTSC 5
R v SAG [2004] QCA 286; 147 A Crim R 301

R v Sirl (No 3) [2019] ACTSC 355

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

Chris Michalopoulos (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel

R Khazma (Crown)

K Musgrove (Offender)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

McKenna Taylor (Offender)

File Numbers:

SCC 106 of 2019

SCC 107 of 2019

SCC 108 of 2019

MOSSOP J:

Introduction

  1. The offender, Chris Michalopoulos, has pleaded guilty to the following offences:

(a) one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a young person between 1 August 2018 and 13 January 2019 contrary to s 56(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (Count 1);

(b) one count of contravening a personal protection order between 23 December 2018 and 26 December 2018 contrary to s 35 of the Personal Violence Act 2016 (ACT) (Count 7); and

(c) one count of contravening a family violence order on 12 January 2019 contrary to s 43(2) of the Family Violence Act 2016 (ACT) (CC2019/877).

  1. The maximum penalties for these offences are as follows:

(a) Section 56 of the Crimes Act: 25 years’ imprisonment;

(b) Section 35 of the Personal Violence Act: five years’ imprisonment and a fine of 500 penalty units; and

(c) Section 43(2) of the Family Violence Act: five years’ imprisonment and a fine of 500 penalty units.

  1. The commission of these offences puts the offender in breach of three good behaviour orders imposed in relation to charges of:

(a)fail to appear after bail undertaking (CC2018/11097); and

(b)contravening a family violence order (CC2018/13664; CC2018/13663).

Facts

  1. The relevant facts are agreed and are set out in the Statement of Facts which formed part of the Crown Tender Bundle as well as in the statements of facts prepared for the offending which is the subject of the breaches of the good behaviour orders.  In summary the facts are as follows.

  1. On 13 July 2018 the offender failed to appear in the Magistrates Court in relation to a drug driving charge after he had given a bail undertaking to do so.  This failure to…

Continue reading R v Michalopoulos

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Michalopoulos [2020] ACTSC 27
Case
[2020] ACTSC 27
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Michalopoulos was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The defendant, Michalopoulos, was charged with maintaining a sexual relationship with a young person, in contravention of both a personal protection order and a family violence order. The victim, who was under the age of 16, and the defendant engaged in illicit drug use together and considered themselves to be a couple. Despite this, the circumstances made it clear to the offender that the victim was under the age of 16.

The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence for Michalopoulos, taking into account the aggravating factors of the contravention of the orders, the illicit drug use, and the offender's relationship with the victim. The court also had to consider the offender's admissions of guilt, his remorse, and his otherwise unblemished criminal record.

The Supreme Court of Victoria held that the circumstances of the case warranted a sentence of imprisonment. The court considered the contravention of the orders and the illicit drug use as significant aggravating factors, and found that the offender's relationship with the victim was particularly egregious given the victim's age. The court also took into account the offender's admissions of guilt and remorse, but ultimately determined that a sentence of imprisonment was necessary to adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment on Michalopoulos, with details of the sentence set out in [45].

Orders

Orders of the court

See [45]

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.