Diversion Application for Aggravated Burglary
This is a case study on a diversion application for Aggravated Burglary as well as Theft charges.
Our client was a 16-year old young man with no prior record. He was charged with two separate offences of Aggravated Burglary on commercial premises. He attended the police for interview and made admissions to his conduct. He came to see us along with his parents as he had a grave concern that he would have a
criminal record which would prevent him for gaining employment in the future, and prevent him from travelling to USA.
Dee Giannopoulos represented the client at the Ringwood Children’s Court. The charges were Aggravated Burglary (person present) and Theft.
Negotiations with the police and prosecution were undertaken in order to limit the number of charges that would proceed before the court. Discussions were also made regarding forensic procedure not being applied for and a reduction in the compensation sought.
We also assisted the client to link in with mental health professionals and education providers so he could be in a position to show the court that he was going to take all the steps necessary to prevent the offending behaviour. This will give the court confidence that he should be given an opportunity to avoid a record.
We further suggested to the client that he find some part-time employment. He listened to our recommendation and gained a part-time job prior to the court date.
A diversion application for Aggravated Burglary and Theft was made next. Diversion is an acknowledgment of responsibility for the offending but, if complied with successfully, would mean that a person will not have a criminal record. This application was successful. The court was very impressed with the work that had been done by our client for his own rehabilitation.
The magistrate was ultimately persuaded to give the client an opportunity to not have the two matters following him around on his criminal record for the future. On the basis that the client successfully completed the conditions of his diversion plan, the two Aggravated Burglary matters against his name were discharged and he does not need to disclose the offending for future travel. He remains record free.
- At the time has with him or her any firearm or imitation firearm, any offensive weapon or any explosive or imitation explosive; or
- At the time of entering the building or the part of the building a person was then present in the building or part of the building and he or she knew that a person was then so present or was reckless as to whether or not a person was then so present.
Other related case studies:
- Aggravated Burglary and Other Charges – No Criminal Priors
- CCO for Aggravated Burglary
- Aggravated Burglary and Armed Robbery
- Withdrawing Aggravated Burglary
- Aggravated Burglary, Theft, and Burglary
Dee is based in our Melbourne office and appears at all Courts in Victoria. Dee’s commitment to her clients and her passion for justice drives her to achieve great results.
Visit Dee’s profile to read more about her background and experience.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 28/08/2019