This is a case study on Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under SORA involving relevant priors.
What is alleged to have occured?
Our client was 25 years old when he was charged with Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under the Sex Offenders Registration Act. He had relevant priors for the same offence but he had a limited criminal history and had received sentences without conviction for previous similar instances of offending. The breach related to failing to notify the police that he had returned from an interstate holiday.
What happened at court?
We acted on the client’s behalf at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court. This was not exactly a simple case as it involved Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under SORA with relevant priors.
The Magistrate was given a full explanation of the instant offence and the previous history of our client. It was accepted that there had been partial compliance with the order and that the breach could be characterised as being very technical. A full explanation of other mitigatory facts was also presented, including our client’s excellent work history.
What was the result?
Our client was convicted and received a financial penalty. Whist there was some escalation in penalty by reason of the recording of a conviction, the Magistrate was persuaded after hearing the submission to confine the disposition to a fine rather than a more onerous order such as imprisonment or a Community Corrections Order.
This was certainly a better outcome than what is usually imposed for a charge of Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under SORA, especially considering the existence of relevant priors.
What is alleged to have occured?
Our client was 25 years old when he was charged with Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under the Sex Offenders Registration Act. He had relevant priors for the same offence but he had a limited criminal history and had received sentences without conviction for previous similar instances of offending. The breach related to failing to notify the police that he had returned from an interstate holiday.
What happened at court?
We acted on the client’s behalf at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court. This was not exactly a simple case as it involved Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under SORA with relevant priors.
The Magistrate was given a full explanation of the instant offence and the previous history of our client. It was accepted that there had been partial compliance with the order and that the breach could be characterised as being very technical. A full explanation of other mitigatory facts was also presented, including our client’s excellent work history.
What was the result?
Our client was convicted and received a financial penalty. Whist there was some escalation in penalty by reason of the recording of a conviction, the Magistrate was persuaded after hearing the submission to confine the disposition to a fine rather than a more onerous order such as imprisonment or a Community Corrections Order.
This was certainly a better outcome than what is usually imposed for a charge of Failing to Comply With Reporting Conditions Under SORA, especially considering the existence of relevant priors.
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 19/11/2017
