Successful Severity Appeal, Non-Conviction for Drive Motor Vehicle with Illict Drug Present In Blood

BD pleaded guilty to the offences of ‘Drive motor vehicle with illicit drug present in blood’ and ‘Possess prohibited drug’ in the Local Court. In the Local Court, she was fined $500.00 and received the minimum license disqualification of 3 months with respect to the first charge. The sentencing Magistrate subsequently dismissed the second charge.

BD instructed Chris Cole to file a Severity Appeal to the District Court with respect to the conviction recorded and fine imposed concerning the first charge. Chris appeared at the Appeal Hearing. He tendered various materials including BD’s Affidavit, character testimonials, and sentencing statistics, etc. Despite the Appeal Judge not being receptive of the submissions initially, ultimately, the Appeal Judge upheld the Appeal and dismissed the offence pursuant to s10(1)(a) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.

This was a pleasing outcome for BD.

Convicted of one count of 'Intimidation' (DV); appealed conviction and appealed final ADVO order to the District Court; appeal upheld; charge dismissed

MS was convicted of one count of Intimidation (DV) after his former wife complained to police that during a road rage style incident he pulled over, banged on her windows, and threatened to kill her, while making a slashing gesture across his throat. At the time the complainant had their 1 year old infant in the car.

MS was represented in the Local Court defended hearing, having pleaded not guilty. However, he was convicted after all the evidence was heard, including the complainant’s evidence.

MS elected to appeal the conviction to the District Court. He also appealed the final ADVO.

Andrew Wright appeared in the appeal. Orders granting leave for the recall of the complainant were made on application to the court, as well as a police witness who was not called in the Local Court.

At the hearing of the appeal, the complainant was cross examined in detail and further submissions were made based on the multiple versions given by the complainant. The District Court Judge presiding was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that an offence had been proven, noting inconsistencies in both accounts before the court.

MS was acquitted of the criminal charge; the final ADVO order which had only several months remaining was confirmed.