When interviewed about the offending, our client was cooperative with the police investigators. The prosecution did not allege a period of trafficking over several months but rather a single date, the date of his arrest. The client pleaded guilty to Trafficking a Drug of Dependence and Possess Proceeds Reasonably Suspected of Being the Proceeds of Crime. The Possess Drug of Dependence charges were withdrawn as they were encapsulated within the trafficking charges.
We acted on the client’s behalf at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on the following charges:
- Trafficking in a Drug of Dependence
- Possession of Drug of Dependence
- Possession of Proceeds Reasonably Suspected of Being the Proceeds of Crime
Our client was at the time employed and completing an apprenticeship. The context and background to the offending was conveyed to the magistrate through written material including a report from his gambling counsellor, as well as references from his parents. The client produced over 10 clean and supervised drug screens.
The magistrate noted the serious nature of the offending, and the harm that drug trafficking (even at an objectively lower level) presents to the broader community. Nevertheless, the magistrate acknowledged that this case of drug trafficking warranted a CCO without conviction. A Community Corrections Order for 18 months was imposed, with a substantial component of unpaid community work (250 hours) along with other conditions such as drug testing and counselling, participating in programs as directed to reduce the risk of further offending – all of which were intended to continue our client’s efforts at his rehabilitation.
It was critical that no conviction was recorded for any of the offences. The magistrate accepted that our client’s continued rehabilitation would be enhanced if he remained in his employment and completed his apprenticeship. A conviction, particularly for drug trafficking, would inevitably lead to his immediate termination and the prospect of not finding suitable employment in the foreseeable future.
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 19/02/2018