R v Milosevski

[2014] NSWDC 333

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Milosevski [2014] NSWDC 333
Hearing dates:	7 November 2014
Date of orders:	07 November 2014
Decision date:	07 November 2014
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of 2 years with a head sentence of 4 years.- No action taken on breach of bond – Ordered to forfeit an amount of $16,980 – Drugs to be destroyed
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Forms 1 – User/dealer – Supply cocaine – Supply methyl-amphetamine – Dealing with the proceeds of crime – Possess cannabis – On s9 bond at time of offence
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Mr Michael Spiro Milosevski
Representation:	Counsel: Ms J Hickleton - Offender Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions
File Number(s):	2013/352335

SENTENCE

1. HIS HONOUR: Many times in this Court have I said the words, “drugs are terrible things”, we have yet another example of the awful consequences that drugs supply and drug use bring.

2. Appearing for sentence today is Michael Milosevski. He does not have the excuse that many drug users and drug suppliers have. Often I am told that because of trauma in a person’s early life, sometimes terrible, awful trauma, people resort to drugs to hide reality. Mr Milosevski’s upbringing had no such problems. He was brought up by a close and loving family who still support him. Mr Milosevski has experienced no obvious trauma that would lead to him needing to block out reality through the use of drugs. Instead he began using drugs with his friends and continued to use them because, especially in the case of cocaine, he really liked it. This is why drugs are such terrible things. They are, as is obvious, addictive. People begin to use drugs and continue using more and more until often enough they end up living the sort of life that Mr Milosevski was leading when he was arrested.

3. The description he gave of his life as a user/dealer is depressing in the extreme. He was living by himself, sitting alone at his home, “off his head” as he described, waiting for customers. He was cut off from his family. He had no real purpose in life apart from using and dealing in drugs. Not surprisingly he describes being arrested by police as a thing that has benefited him enormously. He is no longer using drugs, being in custody. He has reconnected with his family and his life has improved enormously with one qualification of course, that is, that he is in custody, but he has good prospects for the future. He recognises what went wrong and has plans to ensure that that never happens again.

4. He is now 38 turning 39 in two weeks’ time. It is unusual for someone to commit their first serious offence at his age. That is perhaps enough to demonstrate that he does have good prospects of rehabilitation but on top of that he impressed me today when giving evidence, as a man with a genuine desire to better himself and he plans to use his time in custody wisely obtaining qualifications which will assist him to get work once he is released from custody.

5. He has expressed his remorse today in what I believe to be a genuine expression of contrition. He said, probably quite accurately, that what he has done has damaged a lot of families. He knows for himself what can happen to a drug user because it happened to him.

6. I am to sentence Mr Milosevski for two offences. One of supplying cocaine and one of supplying methyl-amphetamine. To each of those offences there are matters attached on a form 1, an offence of dealing with the proceeds of crime is attached to the supply cocaine matter, that related to the sum of $16,980 which was found in Mr Milosevski’s home when he was arrested. The offence attached to the supply methyl-amphetamine matters is an offence of possessing cannabis relating obviously to a quantity of cannabis found in his home when he was arrested.

7. Consistent with what he told police on his arrest and his expression of remorse in court today he has pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. The sentences I am about to announce will be 25% less than they would otherwise have been.

8. Ms Hickleton and the offender himself, as revealed in documents tendered on his behalf, accept that the only possible outcome is a custodial sentence. He has been in custody for almost a year. I am satisfied that a further period of custody is necessary in order to reflect the objective gravity of Mr Milosevski’s criminal conduct.

9. I make a finding of special circumstances in his favour. Clearly, as a long term drug user, he is going to face some challenges when he is released on parole. It is in not only his interests but it is also in the community’s interests that he be assisted upon his release from custody in order to ensure, as far as possible, that he does not fall back to his old ways. For that reason I will make a variation from the statutory ratio of head sentence to non-parole period.

10. I impose an aggregate sentence consisting of a non-parole period of two years with a head sentence of four years to date from 21 November 2013. That means that Mr Milosevski is eligible to be released to parole on 20 November 2015. I can indicate that were it not for me using the aggregate sentence provisions I would have imposed sentences of three years on each of the two matters.

11. Mr Milosevski was on a s 9 bond at the time of this offence. I have taken that into account in deciding the appropriate sentences. Of course his offences represent a breach of that bond, I have decided that there should be no action taken on the breach given the sentences that I have already announced.

12. I order that the drugs are to be destroyed.

13. I will make an order that $16,980 be forfeited.

**********

Decision last updated: 16 June 2015