My client was convicted of a number of counts of sexual touching without consent after a defended Local Court Hearing. My client approached me and sought advice.

Upon an appeal of the finding of guilt, submissions were made concerning the onus and burden of proof which is carried by the Crown in a criminal proceeding.

Detailed consideration was given to the unchallenged evidence in the Local Court and the bearing that had on the assessment of the evidence. Reference was made to the High Court Cases of Liberato (Liberato v The Queen (1985) 159 CLR 507) and De Silva (De Silva v The Queen [2019] HCA 48) which reiterated how a judicial officer should assess competing evidence.

Ultimately His Honour was not satisfied that the Crown had discharged the heavy burden of satisfying the court beyond a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was upheld and the charges were dismissed.

My client was charged under the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 (Cth) arising out of an incident of sexual touching without consent of a child on an aeroplane on its way back to Australia.

My client plead guilty and was concerned about the prospects of a jail sentence. Following advice, my client underwent a psychological evaluation and engaged in rehabilitation.

During sentencing proceedings, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecution sought that a jail sentence be imposed upon my client. Submissions were made concerning mitigating circumstances under s 16A Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and the appropriateness of a community based order as well as the range of sentencing options open to Her Honour in relation to this offence. Ultimately and despite the prosecution’s protestations for a jail sentence, Her Honour was satisfied that the appropriate order was a community based order and subsequently sentenced my client to a community based order.

This was a great result for my client who maintains his liberty and can continue his rehabilitative treatment.

My client was charged with sexual touching without consent arising out of an incident at the Beach Road Hotel in Bondi Beach. Under previous legal representation, he plead guilty, was refused bail and remanded in custody at the Metropolitan Remand & Reception Centre at Silverwater. He sought my advice as to the way forward.

Upon sentencing, submissions were made to Her Honour regarding my client’s prospects of rehabilitation, and why the offending behaviour was an isolated incident inter alia.

Ultimately Her Honour was satisfied that my client should be released immediately with the time already served in custody being adequate punishment when considering the purposes of sentencing.

A great result for my client who was released from jail on the same day as the court proceedings.

My client was charged was disseminating child abuse material which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Following advice and after the negotiation of charges which resulted in the withdrawal of some charges, my client plead guilty.

Upon sentencing, submissions were made concerning my client’s criminal history, the lack of parental figures in his life, the low objective seriousness of the charges, as well as the number and content of images involved. Further consideration was given to the extra-curial punishment that my client endured as a result of the offence.

Submissions were provided concerning the rehabilitative efforts that my client had undergone including psychological consultations and a treatment plan after the offending behaviour.

Ultimately Her Honour was satisfied that the purposes of sentencing would be achieved and taking into account time already served, sentenced my client to a 3 month non-parole period. This means that my client is eligible for release in 3 months.

This was a great result for my client who can look forward to continuing with his rehabilitative efforts upon his upcoming release.

My client was found guilty of six counts of sexual intercourse without consent (aka. rape) and 1 count of intentional choking. Given the seriousness of the charges, a jail sentence was highly likely.

Upon sentencing, submissions were provided to the learned Magistrate regarding the prospects of rehabilitation and the unlikelihood that my client would reoffend. My client was ultimately sentenced to a non-parole period of 2 months in a correctional institution.

I lodged an appeal concerning the finding of guilt and made a bail application for my client to be released pending the determination of the appeal which was granted.

After the appeal was lodged, the Director of Public Prosecutions lodged an appeal against the leniency of the sentence imposed upon my client.

During the appeal, submissions were made concerning the relationship that developed between the complainant and the accused leading up to the incident as well as the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s evidence inter alia.

On appeal, His Honour was ultimately not satisfied that my client was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and dismissed all charges. This meant that the Director of Public Prosecution’s appeal against the leniency of the sentence need not be considered as my client was found not guilty.

This was a great result for my client who had already been sentenced to a period of incarceration with the possibility of a longer sentence being imposed, having his name cleared and being found not guilty of all charges.

My client was charged with transmitting child abuse material. An offence contrary to the Commonwealth Criminal Code which carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment.

I negotiated with Commonwealth prosecutors to amend the factual scenario that my client would be sentenced on should he plead guilty. Following successful negotiations, my client decided to plead guilty.

Upon sentencing, Commonwealth prosecutors submitted that a term of full-time custody (i.e. jail) should be served by my client due to the offence that he committed and Commonwealth criminal legislation providing that a sentence of immediate full-time imprisonment is to be served unless the court finds exceptional circumstances. I was able to successfully submit that a sentence of full-time imprisonment would not serve the purposes of sentencing and be inconsistent with recent case law including R (Commonwealth) v Nafarette [2022] NSWDC 225, which considered what amounted to exceptional circumstances in the context of Commonwealth criminal child sex offence legislation.

Ultimately His Honour was of the view that whilst my client’s crime would be considered offensive to the community, on the basis of R (Commonwealth) v Nafarette [2022] NSWDC 225 inter alia, exceptional circumstances could be found for my client which allowed my client to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment but immediately released.

A great result for my client who can now continue with his rehabilitation and be a productive member of society.

My client was charged with 3 counts of aggravated sexual assault which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment each, 6 counts of sexually touching which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment each and intentionally choking without consent which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. My client was concerned with the prospects of serving a jail sentence (which in the Children’s Court is referred to as a control order). Following advice, I was able to successfully negotiate with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) to downgrade all the charges to four counts of sexual touching without consent. My client saw a psychologist and undertook rehabilitative classes. Upon sentencing, submissions were provided to the learned Magistrate regarding my client’s remorse, contrition, the rehabilitative steps that he had taken, the psychologist’s findings, the high change of rehabilitation of my client, the low chance of reoffending, and why the community would be protected if my client was within the community. Ultimately, His Honour was satisfied that the purposes of sentencing would be achieved by having my client in the community and he was sentenced to good behaviour bonds.

This was a great result for my client who was looking at the prospect of jail time as a real possibility after initially being charged with very serious offences.

My client was charged with sexual touching without consent and was facing at the least, a conviction for a sexual offence which would be devastating to any future work and/or travel prospects that he had planned. Following advice, my client plead not guilty and the matter was contested at Newtown Local Court. During negotiations with police, the factual scenario surrounding the alleged offence was reduced and agreed and as such, my client decided to plead guilty.

During sentencing, submissions were made concerning the relatively low objective seriousness of the offence as well as my client’s personal circumstances. Ultimately Her Honour was satisfied that a conviction was not warranted in my client’s case and whilst my client was found guilty of sexual touching without consent, no conviction was recorded. This was a great result for my client as only 4.4% of findings of guilt attached to sexual touching with consent charges result in no conviction being recorded.

During a relationship breakup, my client send intimate images of his former partner to other people and was subsequently charged with intentionally distributing an intimate image without consent contrary to section 91Q(1) Crimes Act 1900. My client had criminal history and was concerned about the prospects of imprisonment. After negotiating the factual scenario upon which my client would plead guilty, a negotiated position was reached with police and following advice, my client plead guilty.

During sentencing, the Magistrate was informed as to how my client’s mental health diagnoses had impacted his offending as well as his unfortunate background and upbringing. Ultimately whilst His Honour was of the view that the crime was reprehensible and an abuse of trust, His Honour did not think that a jail sentenced was warranted even with my client’s criminal history. As such, my client was released into the community on a bond. This was a great result for my client.

My Client was on a night out in Sydney when he met a girl on the dance floor. Drinking, dancing and flirting ensued. Eventually, my client and his new acquaintance left to go to his place. At his place, they continued drinking, and engaged in consensual sex throughout the night.

The next morning my client’s acquaintance left my client’s house and reported an incident to police involving an allegation of rape. Detectives investigated the matter, obtained a search warrant for my client’s house and executed that warrant the next day. My Client was arrested, charged with two counts of rape and bail was refused by the police.

Family members of my client contacted us and we started working on the matter. We made a bail application for my client and he was released on bail. We then set upon proving his innocence. We appeared at court on multiple occasions for my client while police obtained evidence. Once the evidence was compiled, discussions were had between us and the prosecution which highlighted the flaws and inconsistencies in the prosecution case. Eventually the prosecution agreed that the case had no reasonable prospects of success and the prosecution withdrew both counts of rape. This left my client free to walk out of court without any restrictions or bail conditions with both charges dismissed. A great result!

My client was found guilty in a Local Court Hearing of Sexual Touching without consent at Parramatta Local Court.

My client was a respectable member of the community and this conviction meant that he would lose his career and livelihood.

Following advice, my client appealed the matter to the Parramatta District Court. During the Parramatta District Court Hearing, evidence that demonstrated inconsistencies in the complainant’s account and evidence that questioned the complainant’s motivations to make the complaint were analysed in detail. Submissions were than made to His Honour as to why the finding of guilty was unsafe based on those inconsistencies. Ultimately His Honour was not satisfied that a finding beyond reasonable doubt of guilt was suitable on this evidence and the finding of guilt in the Local Court was overturned.

A great result for my client who can now get on with his life and career.

My client was charged with failing to report as per his obligations on the Child Protection Offenders Registration register. This offence carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.

My client was concerned about a custodial sentence being imposed. Following advice, a plea of guilty was entered.

Upon sentencing, submissions were made concerning the relative objective seriousness of the offence as well as events leading up to the offence which were mitigating for my client.

Ultimately, His Honour was of the view that the offence that my client committed was at the lower end of objective seriousness and sentenced my client with a fine. This was an excellent result for my client, as only 10% of these types of matters result in a fine being imposed.

My Client was on the Child Protection Register as a result of a previous offence against a child. As part of being on the Child Protection Register, my client had obligations to report certain changes in circumstances to police. A breach carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment if prosecuted on indictment. During a routine inspection by child protection Detectives, it was found that my client had failed to report a change in circumstances to police as required by being on the register.

My Client was arrested by Detectives and placed into custody. Upon advice, we advised my client to plead guilty. During sentencing, we made submissions concerning my client’s background and the disadvantaged upbringing which he had. We made submissions as to the seriousness of the offence and why there was a lack of malice associated with my client’s conduct. We also made submissions concerning the remorse and contrition that my client demonstrated after getting caught and why this should be considered by the Magistrate as a mitigating factor upon sentencing. His Honour was ultimately persuaded that a custodial sentence should not be imposed and my client was free to walk out of the courtroom. A great result for my client which allows him to get on with his life.