Suspended Sentence for 19-Year-Old Client Convicted of Wounding and Stalking

In February 2019, our client (19-year-old) was charged with a number of offences in relation to an incident that occurred with his former partner at an address in Ferny Hills.

The initial allegations consisted of:
• Stalking the victim via text messages, phone calls, by attending the victim’s residence and by attending the victim’s work to speak to her (Unlawful Stalking – Domestic Violence Offence);
• Our client attending the victim’s residence and entering via the backdoor (Burglary – Domestic Violence Offence);
• Being armed with a knife and cutting the victim during a physical altercation (Wounding – Domestic Violence).

Samantha O’Connor of our office entered into extensive negotiations with the Office of The Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to deficiencies in the evidence and witness statements. Two submissions were sent on behalf of our client. It was submitted that the burglary charge should be discontinued, that the dates of the charge of stalking be amended and that the factual basis of the wounding be amended. The submission was accepted resulting in a shorter period of stalking being preferred against our client and the burglary charge being discontinued.

Further, the factual basis of the charge was amended with respect to the wounding count, our client was sentenced on the basis that he did not intend to wound the complainant but it was a reasonably foreseeable consequence if his actions of holding an open flick knife in his hand. This had a large impact on the level of criminality associated with the wounding charge.

Wounding is a serious charge that carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment. In R v Meehan [1996] QCA 215 it was said by Justice Demack that offences of wounding, inflicted by the use of a knife, are to be punished by condign sentences, even where the offender is young, is a first offender and is otherwise of good character. R v Cui [2009] QCA 334 and R v Kidner [2005] QCA 430 were comparable cases where the offenders entered pleas of guilty and were first time young offenders, in both cases the defendant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment wholly suspended after serving a short period of actual custody (2 months and 3 months).

The charges were committed to the Brisbane District Court for sentence. An indictment was presented against our client and the matter was listed for sentence. Samantha O’Connor of our office appeared at our client’s sentence before the Brisbane District Court instructing Counsel. Our client entered a plea of guilty at an early stage, had a very limited history, was 19 years of age, had served 11 days in custody prior to obtaining bail, had demonstrated rehabilitation by attending a number of counselling sessions, had been compliant with his strict Supreme Court bail undertaking and co-operated with police by participating in a record of interview and making admissions.

The client was sentenced to a head sentence of 12 months imprisonment wholly suspended for 2 years. Our client was thankful for the excellent result that allowed him to move on with his life and remain in the community.

If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please call Samantha O’Connor on 3009 8452 or 0435 575 867.

Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs, Immediate Parole Release

A search warrant was executed on our client’s dwelling in Surfers Paradise in September 2017. As a result of the search police located various drugs, drug paraphernalia, Australian currency ($3810), a mobile phone and an IPAD. The phone mobile and IPAD contained drug related messages.

An indictment was presented before the Brisbane Supreme Court charging our client with two separate trafficking periods, a 3.5-month period and 2.5-month period. Our client was also indicted with Possessing a dangerous drug in excess of 2.0 grams (11.561 grams gross, 5.884 grams pure), Possessing a dangerous drug (MDMA, Cannabis) and possessing a thing used in connection with trafficking in a dangerous drug (mobile phone and IPAD).

The initial Schedule of Fact provided that our client was a known supplier of drugs based upon the inference that could be drawn from a number of persons contacting our client requesting to visit our client. The Crown alleged that there were 53 supplies in the first trafficking period and 13 supplies in the second period. The Crown alleged that it was difficult to determine the quantities and types of drugs our client was supplying. The Schedule of Facts referred to our client supplying a variety of drugs including cannabis, methylamphetamine and MDMA.

Based upon the initial charges and facts our client was facing a head sentence of 4 – 5 years imprisonment to serve 16 to 20 months.

Sam O’Connor reviewed the cellebrite downloads and concluded it was clear that the second Trafficking Count could not substantiated. It was our view that there was no degree of continuity as is required to carry on a business of trafficking in dangerous drugs. The Crown alleged there were 13 supplies in the specified trafficking period. A submission was drafted to the Crown seeking the second trafficking count be discontinued and that the Crown instead indict our client on 5 separate supply charges (cannabis only). The Crown accepted this submission and agreed to discontinue the second trafficking Count.

It was submitted with respect to the first count of trafficking that:
• the trafficking dates be amended to a shorter period;
• the number of supplies referenced be reduced from 53 to 21;
• the number of customers be reduced from 20 to 8;
• the quantities related to street level only;
• the type of drug trafficked was cannabis only.

We conceded that one supply (acts prepatory only) could be made out with respect to methylamphetamine and submitted that should form a standalone count of supply. Our submission was accepted and the amendments to the facts sought were made. The outcome of this negotiation significantly changed the level of criminality of our client’s offending, whereby our client was to be sentenced for trafficking in a Schedule 2 drug rather than a Schedule 1 drug.

Following the successful negotiations, the matter was listed for sentence before the Brisbane Supreme Court. A head sentence of 3 years imprisonment was imposed with respect to the remaining trafficking count.

Our client had served some 174 days in pre-sentence custody. Our client received immediate parole at the date of sentence after serving just under 6 months of a 36-month sentence. This was an exceptional result in the circumstances, especially given the outcome of the negotiations.

If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please call Samantha O’Connor on 3009 8452 or 0435 575 867.

$5800 cash found in a McDonalds Bin – Possession of Proceeds Charge Discontinued

In September 2019, a search warrant was executed on our client’s address.

At that time police located $5800 concealed in a dirty burger box in a McDonalds bag inside a bin at the residence. Police also located $300 in our client’s pocket, 53 Diazepam tablets and 3 Nitrazepam tablets.

When questioned about the cash located, our client stated to police that the $300 cash was his but that he had not seen the $5800 cash before nor did he know who it belonged to.

Following the search, our client was charged with Possession of property suspected of being the proceeds of an offence under the Drugs Misuse Act and two charges of possessing dangerous drugs.

The charges were listed for a summary trial and the full brief of evidence was ordered.

Section 10A(1)(d) of the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) provides that a person who has in his or her possession any property (other than a dangerous drug, hypodermic syringe or needle) reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of an offence who does not give an account satisfactory to the Court of how the person came by or had such property in the person’s possession commits an offence against this Act. The maximum penalty prescribed is 2 years imprisonment. George v Rockett (1990) 170 CLR 104, 112 defines “reasonably suspected” as “suspected on reasonable grounds.” This requires sufficient facts to induce that state of mind in a reasonable person.

A submission was sent by our office to seeking the Proceeds charge be discontinued given a relative claimed he was the owner of the money located at our client’s house (unbeknown to our client at the time). Further as there was an absence of any other evidence that could establish a reasonable suspicion the cash located was proceeds. It was not the case that tick sheets, drug related messages, large quantities of dangerous drugs or drug paraphernalia were located at the dwelling. The submission was rejected by Police Prosecutions.

Counsel was engaged and a further submission was sent to Police Prosecutions to resolve the need for a summary trial. As a result of the negotiations, Prosecutions agreed to offer no evidence with respect to the Proceeds charge and to roll the two Possessing dangerous drugs charges into one charge.

The remaining charge of possessing a dangerous drug was finalised before the Richlands Magistrates Court. Our client suffered from longstanding anxiety and had previously been prescribed diazepam. However, on the offence date he did not hold a valid prescription for diazepam. Our client entered a plea of guilty to the one charge and a fine of $300 was imposed. Our client was happy with the result.

If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please call Samantha O’Connor on 3009 8452 or 0435 575 867.

No Conviction and Good Behaviour Bond for Festival Magic Mushroom Possession

In September 2019, our client attended a Music Festival in Brisbane where he was detected by Police for possessing approximately 4 grams of Psilocybin otherwise known as Magic Mushrooms.


The drug Psilocybin is a Schedule 2 Drug under the Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld).
Our client was issued with a Notice to Appear for Possession of a Dangerous Drug and attended the Brisbane Magistrates Court represented by Zoe Kansky. Our office entered a plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity and our client was sentenced to a good behaviour bond and a condition to attend the Drug and Alcohol Assessment Referral (DAAR). No conviction was recorded.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.

Choking, Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle and TPO Dropped

In November 2019 our client, a 27-year-old man from Brisbane, was charged with four offences including Choking, Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle, Obstruct Police Officer and Contravene Direction or Requirement of Police in the Ipswich Magistrates Court.


The Police alleged that our client and his partner of 10 years left a party in North Brisbane and an argument ensued on the drive home where our client pulled on the handbrake of the vehicle whilst the car was travelling. The Police further alleged that our client then grabbed his partner’s neck squeezing her throat tightly and pushed her towards the car window so she could not breathe.


After Police attended the scene, our client was uncooperative with Police and refused to provide his full name and attempted to climb out of the Police car window.
Police imposed a Temporary Protection Order under the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (Qld) prohibiting any contact between our client and his partner.


Two weeks after the offence, the complainant withdraw her statement made to Police and provided medical evidence indicating her diagnosis panic attacks and anxiety which involve shortness of breath, sudden fear of terror and overwhelming feelings that she is about to have a heart attack or die. The complainant indicated that our client was holding her by the shoulders to calm her down.


A committal hearing was held and Nicholas Crawford of our office cross-examined the complainant which resulted in the Choking charge being discontinued.


A further submission saw the Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle charge discontinued and the Temporary Protection Order removed and replaced with a Mandatory Good Behaviour Order to allow our client and partner to re-establish contact.


Zoe Kansky of our office represented our client for a plea of guilty to the Contravene Direction or Requirement of Police and Obstruct Police Officer and he was sentenced to a fine with no conviction recorded.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.

Bail for Client Charged with AOBH and Wounding

In October 2019, our office attended the Richlands Watch House where our client, a 22-year-old female from Inala was charged with Assault Occasioning Bodily Harm and Wounding.


It was alleged that our client and the complainant engaged in a verbal argument and our client stabbed the complainant in the hand, lip and mouth causing deep lacerations. Our client was then alleged to hit the complaint to the back of the head with a large piece of wood and stab him in the back with metal tweezers.


Police objected to bail and our client was in a show cause position. After taking instructions, Zoe Kansky of our office showed cause as to why our client’s continued detention was unjustified and our client was released on bail pending resolution of her criminal matters.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.

Contravention of Domestic Violence Order – No Evidence to Offer

In December 2018, our client was charged with Contravening a Domestic Violence order before the Southport Magistrates Court.


A Temporary Protection Order existed between our client and his girlfriend requiring our client to be of good behaviour towards her.


Police alleged that after night clubbing together on the Gold Coast, our client and the complainant were walking on a busy street when a verbal argument ensued and our client grabbed the complainant’s hair and dragged her to the ground.


Upon review of the evidence provided by Police, no CCTV footage was provided, no statements were provided by any witnesses and no formal complaint was ever made to Police by the complainant.


Zoe Kansky of our office completed a written submission to Police Prosecutions and Police offered no evidence to the charge in the Southport Magistrates Court shortly after.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.

Immediate Parole for Exceed Schedule Meth and MDMA

criminal law

In June 2018 our client was charged with two counts of Possessing a Dangerous Drugs with the aggravating feature of being over 2.0 grams. Our client made admissions to possessing the drugs on his person, namely 2.4 grams pure methylamphetamine on the first occasion and 19.6 grams pure methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) on the second occasion.


Zoe Kansky of our office instructing Nick Brown of Counsel appeared before the Supreme Court of Queensland for sentence in October 2019. Our client had a limited history and made significant efforts toward rehabilitation and had commenced living in a residential rehabilitation facility to address his ongoing drug use whilst his Court matters progressed. Our client was subsequently sentenced to a head of three years imprisonment but was granted immediate parole to allow him to continue rehabilitation in the community.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.

Serious Assault of Corrective Services Officer Dropped

In early 2019 our client, a prisoner at the Woodford Correctional Centre, was charged with Obstructing a Staff Member and Serious Assault of a Corrective Services Officer.
The offence of Serious Assault of a Corrective Services Officer carries a maximum term of imprisonment of 7 years imprisonment.


The court brief stated that our client was acting suspiciously and was suspected to have been concealing dangerous drugs on his person in the prison yard. Our client was subject to a removal of clothing search and at this time, our client was alleged to have collided with a Correctional Services Officer causing her to fall back in a whip-like motion.


Our office received instructions from our client who denied any hard collision to the Officer. Our office obtained the CCTV footage and Body-Worn camera footage and Zoe Kansky completed a submission on behalf of our client which saw the Serious Assault offence discontinued by Prosecutions.


Ms Kansky represented our client in the Caboolture Magistrates Court for a plea of guilty to the Obstruction offence and he was sentenced to 1-month imprisonment to be served concurrently to his existing sentence.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.

Supreme Court Bail for Client Charged with Drug Trafficking

criminal law

In January 2020, Zoe Kansky appeared before the Supreme Court of Queensland for an application for Supreme Court bail for our client charged with 41 offences including one count of Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs, 27 counts of Supplying or Possessing Dangerous Drugs and a number of other property and drug offences.


Zoe Kansky argued that our client’s risk of re-offence and risk of failing to appear could be appropriately mitigated through his admission to a residential rehabilitation facility. Our client was granted bail and released that afternoon to a rehabilitation centre allowing him to address his drug addiction while his matters progress in the Supreme Court.


If you are interested in our criminal lawyers acting on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact Zoe Kansky on 3009 8489.