Obtaining Property by Deception, Theft, and Drive Disqualified – Some Charges Withdrawn, Fine Without Conviction

The client had been called and was convinced by a friend to use a stolen credit card for a series of purchases over a two-day period. The friend was also charged and made a statement implicating our client in the online purchase of an expensive electronic device and driving while disqualified, both of which were denied by our client.

Our client faced charges of:

  • Theft
  • Obtaining property by deception
  • Drive disqualified

Andrew George represented our client at the Sunshine Magistrates’ Court.

After discussions with the Prosecution over a number of weeks, including being able to show that the co-accused had lied in his statement to the Police, all disputed charges were withdrawn by the Prosecution. For the remaining charges, a non-conviction fine was imposed.

This outcome was made possible due to the ability to convince the Prosecution that the co-accused was an unreliable witness. This reduced the value of the dishonesty charges significantly, resulting in a non-conviction penalty.

 


Andrew GeorgeAndrew George

Andrew has over 25 years experience as a criminal lawyer and has been an Accredited Criminal Law Specialist since 1995. As Partner of Doogue + George, Andrew oversees all matters run out of the Sunshine office as a commitment to ensuring that your case has a proper and fair hearing to ensure the best outcome possible. Andrew has spent most of his career representing Melbourne’s western suburbs and has a commitment to the working people of Victoria. His experience includes providing criminal defence for a client during IBAC's first major prosecution, Operation Fitzroy.

Visit Andrew’s profile to read more about his 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 25/02/2013