Conditional Release Order Granted, No Conviction

JM was charged with ‘Break & Enter house etc steal value <= $60,000’, contrary to section 112 Crimes Act 1900, ‘Possess/attempt to Prescribed Restricted Substance’ contrary to section 16(1) of Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966. ‘Goods suspected stolen in custody of other’ contrary to section 527C Crimes Act 1900 and ‘Go onto or into or remain on or in running lines etc’, contrary to section 68J(1)(b) Passenger Transport (general) Regulation 2017.

In the Local Court JM was convicted of the ‘Break & Enter’ charge and was ordered to enter a Community Corrections Order pursuant to section 8 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 for a period of 2 years. The remaining charges were placed on a Form 1.

An Appeal was filed to the District Court in relation to the severity of JM’s sentence.

Chris Cole represented JM at his District Court Appeal where he made submissions as to why Her Honour ought to allow the appeal and not convict JM of the ‘Break & Enter’ offence, instead placing him on a Conditional Release Order (without conviction), imposing a condition that he adhere to the Treatment Plan proposed by his treating psychologist. Her Honour was receptive to these submissions and allowed the appeal. JM was able to enter a Conditional Release Order (without conviction) supervised by Community Corrections and access a structured psychological treatment plan.

This was a very pleasing result for JM.

Sentence Appealed, Appeal Granted

SV was charged with four offences – namely, two counts of ‘Supply prohibited drug’, one count of ‘Deal with proceeds of crime’ and one count of ‘Conduct drug premises while child present’.

Chris Cole represented SV in these matters. On the initial charges Chris was able to secure strict but fair bail conditions for SV while he awaited trial.

Chris Cole entered pleas of guilty to ‘Supply prohibited drug’ and ‘Deal with proceeds of crime’ on SV’s behalf. The second charge of ‘Supply prohibited drug’ and ‘Conduct drug premises while child present’ were withdrawn.

Her Honour sentenced SV to a term of full-time imprisonment of 18 months, comprising a non-parole period of 12 months. Chris Cole immediately lodged an appeal to the District Court.

At the Sentence Appeal Chris Cole tendered materials and made oral submissions on SV’s behalf on the severity of the sentence imposed. His Honour was not satisfied that he could order the Sentence be served by way of Intensive Correction Order (ICO). However, His Honour accepted that the Sentence was excessive and granted SV’s Appeal. He imposed a lesser sentence of 12 months imprisonment and a non-parole period of 7 months.

This was a satisfactory outcome.

Not Guilty of Stalk/Intimidate/Assault

JK was charged with ‘Stalk/ Intimidate’, contrary to section 13(1) Crimes (Domestic & Personal Violence) Act 2007 and ‘Common Assault’, contrary to section 61 Crimes Act 1900.

Chris Cole and Simon Buchen SC represented JK in these matters. The prosecution closed their case and JK was called to give evidence in the defence case. Counsel made submissions concerning why JK ought not to be convicted of both offences and why the court ought not to make orders for an Apprehended Violence Order. His Honour delivered an Ex Tempore Judgment and found JK not guilty of both offences. Additionally, he did not make an order for an Apprehended Violence Order.

Counsel then made submissions as to why court ought to grant professional costs in JK’s favour. This matter has been adjourned to a later date.

This is a very pleasing result for JK who is able to maintain his strong reputation in the community. 

Found Not Guilty of Sexual Intercourse without Consent

JC was charged with one count of ‘Sexual intercourse without consent’ contrary to the Crimes Act 1900.

Chris Cole represented JC at the Parramatta Children’s Court in relation to this matter where His Honour found JC not guilty of that offence. His Honour found uncertainties concerning the complainant’s evidence and accepted JC’s evidence. His Honour did not make an Apprehended Violence Order.

This is a wonderful result for JC.

Appeal Granted, Suspension Revoked

DK was charged with ‘driving with an illicit substance present in oral fluid, urine or blood’, namely, cocaine.

Chris Cole represented DK and made submissions to the court on the likely impact a driver’s license suspension would have on DK as a self-employed labourer. Prior to the Appeal Hearing DK completed the Traffic Offenders Intervention Program.

His Honour granted the appeal and quashed the suspension.

This was a huge relief for DK.

RMS Appeal, Suspension Quashed

TO had his driver’s license suspended for ‘driving with an illicit substance present in oral fluid, urine or blood’, namely, methylamphetamine.

Chris Cole represented TO in his Appeal. Prior to appearing TO completed the Traffic Offenders Intervention Program. TO is self employed and reliant on his driver’s license to perform work. Chris Cole made submissions to the court on the likely effect of the driver’s license suspension on TO.

His Honour was of the view that a license suspension was unnecessary for the appealant and an Appeal was granted. Ultimately, His Honour revoked the suspension imposed by RMS.

This was a huge relief for TO as his driver’s license is essential to his financial stability.

Charged with Stalk/Intimidate Offence, Acquitted

GK was charged with, ‘Stalk or Intimidate Intending to Cause Fear of Physical or Mental Harm’ contrary to section 13(1) of Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007. His matter proceeded to a defended Hearing where he was represented by Chris Cole. GK gave evidence and the complainant was cross-examined by Chris.

Chris made submissions as to why His Honour would find GK ‘not guilty’ of the above offence. Ultimately, His Honour found GK not guilty and acquitted him of the offence.

This was a great outcome for GK and placed him in a better position concerning his Family Law Proceedings.

Common Assault on Ex-partner, CCO Imposed

LA was charged with three sets of assault offences. The first set proceeded to Hearing but was dismissed when the complainant admitted she lied to police. In relation to the second set of offences, the charges were withdrawn based on unreliable evidence from the complainant following her admission on the first set of allegations.

On the last set of offences, LA was charged with ‘Common Assault’, two counts of ‘Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm’ and three counts of ‘failure to appear’. After sending Written Representations to Withdraw Charges, the prosecution withdrew the AOABH charges.

LA pleaded guilty to ‘Common assault’, contrary to section 61 Crimes Act 1900, and three counts of ‘failure to appear’, contrary to section 79(1) Bail Act 2013.

In relation to the common assault offence, Her Honour imposed a Community Corrections Order pursuant to section 8 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 for 6 months. In relation to the failure to appear offences, Her Honour convicted LA with no other penalty, pursuant to section 10A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

This is an outstanding result for LA.

Section 32 Applied, Heard and Granted

GS was charged with two offences namely, ‘Intentionally or recklessly destroy/damage property’, contrary to section 195(1)(a) Crimes Act 1900, and ‘Unlawful entry on inclosed lands’, contrary to section 4(1)(b) Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901.

GS was diagnosed with First Episode Manic Psychosis of Bipolar Affective Disorder. His treating psychiatrist formed the opinion that he was in the midst of the first episode of his illness at the time of the offence. He was of the view that the offending behaviour was a direct consequence of the mental condition GS was suffering from.

GS made a section 32 application pursuant to Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1900 for his matter to be dealt with under the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1900 instead of under the criminal justice system.

During section 32 Hearing, Chris Cole tendered materials on GS’s behalf including a medical report by GS’s treating Psychiatrist and a letter from a doctor in Mental Health Acute Care confirming they were supervising GS’s compliance with his treatment plan.

Her Honour accepted the treating psychologist’s expert opinion and accepted that GS was suffering from a mental illness, and that it was more appropriate that his matter be dealt with under the Mental Health Act than the criminal justice system.

Ultimately, the offences were dismissed, and GS was discharged upon entering a treatment plan for 6 months supervised by his doctor.

Charged with Seven Serious Offences, CCO Imposed

RA was charged with seven serious offences namely, two counts of ‘Supply of prohibited drugs’, contrary to section 25(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, three counts of ‘Possess prohibited weapon’, contrary to section 7(1) Weapons Prohibition Act 1998, one count of ‘Possess unregistered firearm’ contrary to section 36(1) Firearm Act 1996; and one count of ‘Goods in custody’, contrary to section 527C(1)(a) Crimes Act 1900.

James Castillo successfully negotiated the matter with the Police Prosecutors to withdraw the ‘goods in custody’ offence and place the two counts of ‘possess prohibited weapon’ and ‘possess unregistered firearm’ on Form 1.

RA pleaded guilty to the two supply prohibited drugs offences and one count of ‘possess prohibited weapon’. Chris Cole represented RA on his Sentence and made submissions on why CCO is an appropriate sentence. His Honour agreed and imposed a Community Corrections Order for 12 months pursuant to section 8 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure Act) 1999 concerning the supply of prohibited drug offences and the same Order for 30 months for the possess prohibited weapon offence taking into account all the charges on Form 1 with an additional condition to complete 180 hours of Community Service.

This is a pleasing result for RA given he originally faced 7 serious charges and having breached an existing CRO and CCO when he committed the above offences.

Two Charges Withdrawn, One Plea of Guilty, One Charge Placed on Form 1

BE was charged with three offences – ‘Aggravated break & enter and commit serious indictable offence’, contrary to section 112(2) Crimes Act 1990; ‘Goods in personal custody suspected of being stolen’, contrary to section 527c(1)(A); and ‘Aggravated break & enter dwelling in company steal < = $60,000’, contrary to section 112(2) Crimes Act 1900.

James Castillo successfully negotiated on BE’s behalf to have the offences of ‘Aggravated break, enter and steal’ and ‘Enter enclosed land without lawful excuse’ withdrawn. A plea of guilty was entered to ‘Stealing from a dwelling house’, contrary to section 148 Crimes Act 1900 and the offence of ‘Goods in personal custody suspected of being stolen’ was placed on Form 1.

Her Honour sentenced BE to 18 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 10 months. This is a pleasing result for BE, particularly in light of the objective seriousness of the initial charges.

Charges Dismissed Under Section 32 ‘Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act

JS was charged with ‘Stalk or intimidate intending to cause fear of physical or mental harm’ contrary to section 13(1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 and ‘Common Assault’ contrary to the Crimes Act 1900.

JS had unfortunately been attacked less than one month prior to his offence, triggering the exacerbation of his existing severe multiple mental health conditions.

James Castillo represented JS at the Downing Centre Local Court, making an application under section 32 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act. James Castillo tendered materials from JS’ psychiatrist and occupational therapist, and made oral submissions on his behalf.   

His Honour accepted the application made by James Castillo, exercising his discretion under section 32(3) Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act. Ultimately, His Honour dismissed both on the condition that JS comply with the treatment plan proposed by his psychiatrist.

This was a great result for JS as both charges were dismissed and he was able to continue his psychiatric treatment.

Not Guilty Pursuant to Mental Health Act

AD was charged with ‘Wound person with intent to cause grievous bodily harm’, contrary to section 33(1) Crimes Act 1900; and ‘Reckless wounding’, contrary to section 35(4) Crimes Act 1900.

Chris Cole represented AD in these matters. AD was found not fit to plead or stand trial after having been assessed by both a clinical Neuropsychologist and a Forensic Psychiatrist. It was determined that the accused was suffering from schizophrenia at the time of offending with severe psychotic symptoms.

Subsequently, AD was found not guilty on the grounds of mental illness. This is a pleasing result considering the seriousness of the offence and allows AD to continue to access the psychological treatment he requires.

Larceny Matter, Max Sentence of 5 Years, Sentenced to 1 Month

MD was charged with ‘Larceny’ contrary to section 117 of the Crimes Act 1900. The offence carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years.

James Castillo represented MD at the Central Local Court on which occasion the matter was listed for Sentence. James Castillo tendered materials and made oral submissions on MD’s behalf where His Honour sentenced MD to one month imprisonment, backdated for time already being served.

This is a great result as MD is in the process of applying for permanent residency in Australia and hopes to continue an apprenticeship.

Drive with High Range PCA, Fined and License Disqualified for 6 Months

AH was charged with the offence ‘Driving with high range PCA’, contrary to section 110 (5)(c) Road Transport Act 2013 reading 0.225.

Chris Cole represented AH at Burwood Local Court. Her Honour ordered AH to pay a fine of $1,500, that he be disqualified from holding any driver’s licence for 6 months and that he holds an interlock driver license for 24 months.

This is an outstanding result, noting the seriousness of the offence.

‘Possess Prohibited Drug’ Offence Sentenced to Conditional Release Order without Conviction, No Criminal Record

AH was charged with ‘Possess Prohibited Drug’ contrary to section 10(1)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

Chris Cole represented AH at the Waverley Local Court. The presiding Magistrate sentenced AH to a Conditional Release Order (without conviction) subject to good behaviour for a period of six months.  

This was an outstanding result for AH who regularly travels to the USA for work. A criminal conviction would jeopardise his continued employment

Charged with ‘Drive while prohibited drug present in oral fluid’, receives Conditional Release Order with no conviction recorded

ST was charged with ‘Drive while prohibited drug present in oral fluid’, namely cannabis.

Chris Cole tendered material and oral submissions on ST’s behalf as to why Her Honour ought not to convict him. Her honour agreed and ST was placed on a Conditional Release Order without conviction for a period of six months.

This was a great outcome for ST as it did not impede on his future hopes of joining the Australian Defence Force and he was able to continue driving.

Charged with Multiple Drug-related Offences, Downgraded and Form 1 Granted, Sentenced to Intensive Correction Order

JM was charged with four offences ­-- ‘Supply Prohibited Drug’, ‘Possess Prohibited Drug’, ‘Drive with drug present in oral fluid’ and ‘Proceeds of Crime’.

Chris Cole represented JM in this matter. The charge of ‘Supply of Prohibited Drug’ was downgraded to ‘Knowingly take part in supply of prohibited drug’ and the further offence ‘Proceeds of Crime’ was placed on a Form 1.

Chris represented JM at Downing Centre Local Court where he tendered materials and made oral submissions supporting JM’s otherwise sound character and remorse at his offending behaviour.

Due to his lack of prior offences and low risk of reoffending His Honour sentenced JM to an Intensive Correction Order of 10 months with supervised drug screens for to ‘Knowingly take part in supply of prohibited drug’, a Fine of $330 for ‘Possess Prohibited Drug’ and Conditional Release Order (without conviction) of 10 months.

This is a very pleasing result for JM given the maximum term of imprisonment for these charges. He instead is able to remain in the community and continue driving

Charged with Dealing with Proceeds of Crime, Bail Granted

DL is charged with ‘Dealing with proceeds of crime’ contrary to section 193C Crimes Act 1900. He instructed Chris Cole to make a release application. During his bail submissions, Chris Cole addressed bail concerns in relation to DL being released from custody. Chris successfully argued through the proposed bail conditions that all risks recognised by the prosecution can be mitigated by bail conditions. Some of his bail conditions include to be of good behaviour, to surrender his passport, reporting duties and a residential condition.

Having his bail granted is huge relief for DL and his family.

Pleaded Guilty to Driving with Low-range PCA, Received a CRO with no conviction

CD was charged with the offence of ‘Driving with Low-Range PCA’. He pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. Chris Cole represented him on his sentence submissions. Chris tendered materials on his behalf and made oral submissions as to why he should not be convicted.  His Honour agreed and imposed a Conditional Release Order without conviction pursuant to section 9(1)(b) of Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 subject to good behaviour bond for two years.

This is a pleasing result for CD as a conviction which leads to license suspension would greatly affect his own business requiring him to drive long distances each day and eventually affect his ability to provide for his wife and newborn baby.