DPP v Dattoli [2025] VCC 1901

(a) One charge of prohibited person possess a silencer, contrary to s 5C of the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment;

(b) One charge of unauthorised possession of a trafficable quantity of unregistered firearms, contrary to s 7C of the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment;

(c) One charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence - commercial quantity, contrary to s 71AA of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment;

(d) One charge of possession of a drug of dependence, contrary to s 73 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 1 year's imprisonment; and

(e) One charge of possession of a precursor chemical, contrary to s 71D of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 600 penalty units, 5 years' imprisonment or both.

(a) One charge of common assault, contrary to common law, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years' imprisonment;

(b) Two charges of trafficking in a drug of dependence - commercial quantity, contrary to s 71AA of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic) ('DPCSA'), each of which carry a maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment;

(c) One charge of possessing a drug of dependence, contrary to s 73 of the DPCSA which carries a maximum penalty of 1 year's imprisonment;

(d) One charge of recklessly dealing with proceeds of crime, contrary to s 194(3) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment; and

(e) One charge of possession of identification information, contrary to s 192C(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of no more than 3 years' imprisonment.

1. You have also pleaded guilty to the following related summary offences and have agree to this court sentencing you for them:

(a) One charge of contravene conduct condition of bail, contrary to s 30A(1) of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment;

(b) One charge of possess cartridge ammunition whilst not holding a firearms licence, contrary to s 124(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 40 penalty units;

(c) One charge of possess prohibited weapon without an exemption, contrary to s 5AA of the Control of Weapons Act 1990 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment;

(d) One charge of deal with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, contrary to s 195 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment;

(e) One charge of commit indictable offence whilst on bail, 30B of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 3 months' imprisonment.

(f) Fail to comply with a direction under a warrant, contrary to s 465AAA(4) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years' imprisonment;

1. You are to be sentenced on the basis of the Summaries of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 25 March 2025 and 29 August 2025 respectively, which I note are agreed documents.[1]
2. As there are two Summary of Prosecution Opening documents, I will address the offending in chronological order.

4 August 2022 Offending - Subject of Indictment No. N11661228.B.

1. On 4 August 2022, police executed a search warrant at your then residence at 601/154 High Street Preston. By residing at this address, you were in contravention of your bail conditions (Summary Charge 11 - Contravene conduct condition on bail).You did not answer the door and police forced entry, locating you in the study.
2. You were asked whether you had any firearms at the premises and you said that you had just hidden one on the top shelf of the wardrobe in the study.
3. In a black bag under the sofa in the lounge room, police located the following:

(a) A loaded sawn off shot gun serial number 697965. This was later identified as having been stolen during a burglary in Warrnambool in 2020. (Charge 2 - Unauthorised possess of trafficable quantity of unregistered firearms)

(b) Two shotgun shells in the shotgun; (Summary Charge 16 - Summary Charge 16 - Possess cartridge ammunition whilst not holding a firearms' licence)

(c) 14 shotgun shells in a belt; (Summary Charge 16)

(d) 1 round of .30 calibre ammunition; (Summary Charge 16)

(e) 1 round of .22 calibre ammunition; (Summary Charge 16)

(a) A silver revolver; (Charge 2)

(b) 6 rounds of .357 calibre ammunition in the revolver; (Summary Charge 16)

(c) A box containing nine bottles of butanediol on the floor of the wardrobe; (Charge 3 - Trafficking in a drug of dependence - commercial quantity)

(d) A firearm silencer in a shoebox on the top shelf of the wardrobe; (Charge 1)

(e) 1 snaplock bag containing 13.3g cannabis on the desk; (Charge 4 - Possession of a drug of dependence)

(f) 1 extendable baton on the desk; (Summary Charge 18 - Possess prohibited weapon without an exemption)

(g) 1 snaplock bag containing 3 x .357 calibre rounds of ammunition in the top drawer of the desk; (Summary Charge 16)

(h) 1 box containing 50 x .22 calibre rounds of ammunition in the top drawer of the desk; (Summary Charge 16)

(i) A bag containing 6 x .22 calibre rounds of ammunition in a black case under neath the desk; (Summary Charge 16)

(j) a bag containing iodine in the top drawer of the desk; (Charge 5 - Possession of a precursor chemical)

(k) cash in various denominations in the second draw of the desk and the black bag totalling $17,275. (Summary Charge 25 - Deal with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime)

(l) a snap lock bag containing 24g methylamphetamine. (Charge 4)

(a) A blue iPhone;

(b) A black iPhone;

(c) Two extendable batons; (Summary Charge 18)

(d) A bag containing methylamphetamine weighing less than 1 gram; (Charge 4)

(e) A second bag containing methylamphetamine weighing less than 1 gram; (Charge 4)

(f) A bag containing red phosphorus in a cabinet; (Charge 5)

(g) A bottle containing hypophosphorous acid in a cabinet. (Charge 5)

1. In addition, police located a "tick" notebook, electronic scales, multiple unsealed bags and heat sealers, empty ziplock bags and rubber bands, all consistent with the trafficking of drugs of dependence. (Summary Charge 26).
2. The total amount of 1,4 butanediol located was 4,406.2g. (Charge 3)
3. The total weights of precursor chemicals located were:

(a) 983g of Iodine; (Charge 5)

(b) 202g of phosphorus; (Charge 5)

(c) 1,237g of hypophosphorous acid. (Charge 5)

1. You were arrested and transported to Mill Park Police Station, where you answered "no comment" to all questions regarding the offending.
2. You were asked to provide access to your mobile phone pursuant to s.465AA of the Crimes Act 1958 but you refused (Summary Charge 27 - Fail to comply with a direction under a warrant).
3. At the time of the offending, you were on bail (Summary Charge 26 - Commit indictable offence whilst on bail).

26 September 2024 Offending - Subject of Indictment No. R10457020

1. At the time of this offending, you were on bail for the charges outlined above. You were also subject to a Community Correction Order imposed by the Dandenong Magistrates Court on 25 October 2023.
2. On 26 September 2024, you were at the house of the complainant, Felice Giuliano. You knew Mr Giuliano as you had spent time in prison together and had shared a house in Preston.
3. Mr Giuliano was lying on the couch when you walked toward him. You kicked the computer table that was in front of the couch and then punched Mr Giuliano to the face with a closed right fist. You punched him about 5 times. (Charge 1 - Common Assault)
4. After each punch you made various accusations against Mr Giuliano, such as that he had stolen from you and that he was living with your ex-partner, which he denied.
5. At the time of the assault, another unknown male was present but was not involved in the attack on Mr Giuliano.
6. You left a short time later and Mr Giuliano was taken by a friend to Springvale police station to report the assault. The right side of his face was swollen. Photographs were taken by police of his injuries.

1. On 27 February 2025, you attended at Moorabbin police station by appointment.
2. You were arrested and participated in a record of interview.
3. During the interview, you were told that a warrant would be executed at your home address and were asked what police would find there. You answered "a little bit of ice and weed."
4. The interview was suspended and you were then taken to your home address at 601/52 High Street Preston. During the journey, you said to police that there may be "a bit of meth and cannabis" at the address.

1. Police entered the premises after speaking to another person present, Yulia Minaker, who was initially arrested but not charged.
2. A police dog was brought to the residence and located a false front on a wardrobe. Inside were multiple envelopes marked "28x6" and zip lock bags marked "28" containing crystals.
3. I accept the prosecution submission that these markings represent 28g i.e. one ounce measurement of methylamphetamine.
4. Inside the false compartment, police located:

(a) A black envelope containing a substance believed to be cocaine;

(b) A "tick book" containing dates and quantities;

(c) Australian currency in $20 and $50 notes.

1. When asked by police, you admitted that the money totalled about $20,000. You also confirmed that the drugs seized were "ice".
2. In a cupboard above the refrigerator, police found further items including:

(a) A bag containing a crystal substance believed to be methylamphetamine;

(b) Small bottles believed to contain 1,4 Butanediol labelled "Presha Fruit";

(c) Identity cards in the names of John McMullen, Ryan Richard, Daniel Hansen and Baro Singh. (Charge 6 - Possession of identification information)

1. In the bedroom, police found a blue toolbox, which contained a number of smaller cardboard boxes. In these boxes police found more bottles of 1,4 butanediol, the bottles being labelled "Nicotinamide Moisturising Toner".
2. The total amount of cash seized was $20,320.00 (Charge 5 - Recklessly deal with proceeds of crime).
3. The drugs seized at the premises were later analysed as follows:

(a) Methylamphetamine 623.4 g (mixed)/456-567g pure; (Charge 2 - Traffick in a drug of dependence - commercial quantity)

(b) 1,4 Butanediol 5.34366 kg (Charge 3 - Traffick in a drug of dependence - commercial quantity)

(c) Cocaine 13g (Charge 4 - Possess a drug of dependence (cocaine))

1. You were returned to Moorabbin police station and the recorded interview recommenced, with you making "no comment" to the allegations.

1. This was criminal offending on a significant scale. Clearly the most serious charges concern trafficking commercial quantities of drugs. Of these, the charge concerning the significant quantity of methylamphetamine found at your home on 27 February 2025 is the most serious. You possessed 623.4g mixed which was between 456g and 567g pure of the drug. This is higher than mid-range offending. You also possessed a significant quantity of 1,4 Butanediol.
2. The offending on 4 August 2022 and 27 February 2025 occurred while you were on bail.
3. In addition, in February 2025, you had in your possession a loaded sawn off shotgun together with other ammunition as well as a loaded revolver, other ammunition and a silencer.
4. In the recent case of Young, the Court of Appeal made the following observations concerning a case where an offender was facing both drug trafficking and firearms charges:

"There are many cases where the possession of a firearm in close connection with quantities of drugs and drug paraphernalia permitted the inference that the firearm was an accoutrement of the crime of drug trafficking...".[2]

5. The Court went on to conclude that in such a case it may be appropriate:

'... to sentence the [offender] for a more serious instance of the firearm offence because it was associated, albeit incidentally, with the commission of other criminal offending, so much fitting what Redlich JA described in Berichon[3] as the more serious form of the firearm offence'.[4]

6. In my view, yours is such a case. I conclude that the firearms and ammunition found by police are properly seen as accoutrements of drug trafficking in the absence of any other explanation.
7. Overall, your moral culpability for the offending is considerable. I can only reduce your culpability by a modest amount based on the opinion of Dr Hughes that your ADHD reduces your ability to measure your behavioural responses.[5]

1. You were born in February 1980 and are currently 45 years' of age. You were aged 42 and 45 at the time of the offending. The days when you could claim to be young and immature are long gone.

1. Your parents, Mario and Annette, both migrated from Italy to Australia in 1963. In 2019, your father had a serious health scare and was diagnosed with a tumour on his kidney and then underwent treatment to ensure that no further cancer remained. Both of your parents are now of ill health, with your father having been diagnosed with Parkinsons and your mother experiencing kidney problems.
2. Your childhood was relatively normal and stable. You attended Thomastown Primary School then attended Lalor High School. Your schooling was affected by your pursuit of your tennis career as a junior during which you started spending many months of the year overseas training and competing.
3. You commenced playing junior tennis in a semi-professional level in primary school. In around 1996 when you were around 15/16 years of age you moved to Germany to participate in specialised coaching and training. You remained in Germany for about 6 months travelling around Europe participating in the summer circuit before returning to Australia.
4. In May 1998 you were involved in a serious car accident in Germany where you sustained significant injuries. These made you unable to walk for four months or travel. The injuries seriously impacted your tennis career and you lost the opportunity to participate in tournaments. You lost the remainder of that year rehabilitating from your injuries. You returned to Australia in 1999.
5. You left professional tennis for a few years and then returned to competing when you were 21/22 years of age. You had some success until you suffered a further injury to your arm. You continued to compete despite carrying the injury. You stopped playing professional tennis when you met Sheila in 2003.

1. After meeting Sheila in 2003, you relocated to the United Kingdom when Sheila's mother was diagnosed with lung cancer. Over a four-year period, you and Sheila had been trying to start a family. After numerous IVF and other treatments, you were unsuccessful in conceiving children. This was the breaking point of your relationship, and you and Sheila divorced in late 2008. You were shattered by the loss of this relationship and the opportunity to have children. You continue to grieve the loss of the relationship and not being able to have children of your own.
2. In 2009 you returned to Australia, to work as a tennis coach. You had entered into a business arrangement with your brother Joe in 2012, which had become financially crippled and by the end of 2012 you were bearing the responsibility of a significant financial debt from the business. This caused a serious fracture within the family.
3. The failures of the business, the relationship with Sheila and inability to have children all came to a head by the end of 2013 and your life spiralled out of control. By November 2013 you had begun using recreational drugs and were then introduced to ice.
4. In 2014 you were in a toxic relationship with Harvey. During this time and the years following, you continued to use and abuse drugs. You engaged in low level drug trafficking to support your daily ice habit. You continued abusing substances and storing firearms, ammunition and drugs for associates as well as engaging in trafficking to support your use of methylamphetamine and 1-4 Butanediol.
5. These behaviours ultimately resulted in criminal charges, court appearances and sentences which are detailed below.

1. Your prior criminal history in this court is highly relevant to this court's sentencing task.
2. Your criminal record dates back to November 2014 when you were sentenced in the Magistrates' Court to 12 months' imprisonment in combination with an 18 month community correction order for offending that included trafficking in a drug of dependence.
3. On 26 August 2015, you were sentenced by this court to 3 years and 3 months' imprisonment for offending that included one count of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, a further count of trafficking simpliciter and a count of dealing with property suspected to be proceeds of crime.[6] A non parole period of 18 months was set. The offending, which occurred in November 2014, was assessed by the court as mid-range.
4. In sentencing you, the court referred to your prior good character and that your history of convictions had only commenced in May 2014 as being relevant to your prospects of rehabilitation. The court referred to the character evidence from your sister Linda and your intimate partner at the time a Ms Bramdan. Ms Bramdan told the court that you were acting as a father for her two sons.
5. Based on this material, his Honour Judge Murphy assessed your rehabilitation prospects as good.
6. Despite this assessment, you further offended in April 2019 having also been sentenced to 3 months' imprisonment by the Magistrates' Court in April 2017.
7. You faced a single charge of trafficking in methylamphetamine and ecstasy as well as a charge of dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime.
8. On 10 February 2021, you were sentenced by his Honour Judge Wischusen of this court to 178 days in custody together with a two year community correction order.
9. The court noted that your prior offending consisted of three previous sentences for trafficking drugs of dependence which had resulted in three terms of imprisonment.
10. A number of references, including one from your sister Linda, were provided to the court.
11. In assessing your prospects of rehabilitation, the court noted that:

"I must say that, in my view, even now they should be more properly assessed as guarded. The failure of earlier sentencing occasions to change your behaviour, and the readiness with which you resumed significant drug use and significant drug trafficking after a period of enforced abstinence in custody sound, in my view, a strong note of caution about your chances of not reoffending by relapse into drug use".[7]

1. Turning to your current prospects, your counsel submitted that your rehabilitation prospects should not be considered to be without hope. Ms Ristivojevic referred to your continued family support from your sisters and your new-found domestic stability as a result of your relationship with Ms Jayne Payne who has now taken your surname. Ms Payne wrote to the court in September 2025 about the relationship and the support you provide for her young daughter. She was present in court throughout your case.
2. The assessment of an offender's prospects of leading a productive life in the community is a difficult aspect of the sentencing process. It necessarily involves a degree of prophesising the future.
3. Often the best guide to future behaviour is past behaviour. It will usually be necessary to judge any current commitments in light of that past history.
4. In your case, that past behaviour includes what is now a 10-year period of repeated drug trafficking offending. You have been sentenced to four terms of imprisonment for drug trafficking. On any view the current offending is the most serious in which you have engaged. It is a significant escalation on your previous history of offending which was concerning enough. The principal and most concerning differences are the quantities of the drugs involved and especially the firearms-related offending.
5. Further, what I have heard about the support you have from your family and Ms Datolli is very similar to what this court heard on the occasions referred to earlier.[8] In light of your further offending, I view what I have heard with some scepticism. Actions always speak louder than words.
6. I accept that your prospects are not extinguished but can't be assessed as any higher than poor. You are still only 45 years of age and you have much to live for. Whether you will eventually break this cycle of offending will be up to you.

1. To promote consistency in sentencing outcomes, a court is required to consider current sentencing practices. While a consideration of other similar cases can be helpful, they are not precedents and cases must be sentenced on the basis of their own facts and circumstances.
2. In the case of Gregory, the Court of Appeal called for an uplift in the sentences imposed for commercial quantity drug trafficking. The court considered that 'sentences well into double figures' can be expected where one or more of the following features is present:

(a) The quantity involved approached the large commercial quantity threshold;

(b) The offender was in charge of the trafficking business;

(c) The business was conducted for a substantial period;

(d) The offender pleaded not guilty; and/or

(e) The offender had relevant prior convictions.[9]

1. The Court of Appeal has subsequently explained that, despite the decision of the High Court in Dalgliesh - to the effect that current sentencing practices are not a controlling factor - the Court's observations in Gregory remain relevant.[10]
2. In Gioffre, Taylor JA refused leave to appeal against a sentence of 10 years and 6 months on a charge of commercial quantity trafficking of methylamphetamine.[11] The offender pleaded guilty to a charge of single date trafficking by possession of about 4 times the commercial quantity by weight. He had previously served terms of imprisonment for drug trafficking. The sentence was described as 'stern' but not even arguably manifestly excessive.
3. In your case, features (a) and (e) of the Gregory list are clearly satisfied. The quantity of methylamphetamine (pure) was between 456g and 567g. The lower end of this range is more than 9 times the commercial quantity of 50g and only a little under the large commercial quantity threshold of 500 g. Your prior drug trafficking convictions were discussed earlier.
4. Further, while you have pleaded guilty to single date trafficking, the objective gravity of your offending is to be assessed having regard to your role.[12] Here, the presence of zip lock bags, a 'tick book' and significant quantities of cash suggest that this was a trafficking business and you were in charge.
5. I have had regard to two other first instance decisions of this court to which I was referred. In Taing, a sentence of seven years' imprisonment was imposed for a rolled up charge of trafficking a commercial quantity.[13] The offender had a relevant criminal history. In the case of Money, the offender was sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment for commercial quantity trafficking of methylamphetamine and 4 years' imprisonment for commercial quantity trafficking of 1,4 Butanediol.[14] He also had prior convictions for drug trafficking.
6. While the cases to which I have referred have assisted me in understanding current sentencing practices, individualised sentencing means that you must be sentenced for your crimes having regard to the facts and circumstances of your offending and the relevant matters of mitigation to which I now turn.

1. There are two reports before the Court which have been produced by medical practitioners that were engaged by your solicitors. I have already made brief reference to Ms Carla Ferrari's report. It is necessary to note her opinion at paragraph 144. Ms Ferrari describes you as:

"... a 44-year-old male presenting with a history indicative of repeated episodes of Major Depressive Disorder with anxious distress, which appear to have developed following involvement in a severe [motor vehicle accident] at age 18 which derailed his tennis career, and ultimately although he attempted to return to play after he recovered, his performance was significantly compromised. A further injury at age 21-22 ended his career, and Mr Dattoli struggled to cope with this loss of his identity and his future aspirations, finding it difficult to navigate his grief and role transition from being an elite athlete to not having any clear career path or qualifications to proceed with. This took a significant toll on Mr Dattoli, contributing to a sense of grief, loss, displacement, and dejection which affected his self-esteem, mood, and his functioning."

"He has experienced recurrent episodes of depression in the context of subsequent stressors, including the IVF journey with his ex-wife which put significant mental, emotional, and financial strain on their relationship, and the subsequent breakdown of their marriage due to the compounded stress of this process in addition to an ectopic pregnancy. It was during this period that Mr Dattoli had commenced self-medicating with cocaine whilst in the UK to cope with the repeated IVF failures and impact of this on his relationship, and upon breakdown of his marriage, began abusing alcohol for a period upon his return to Australia."

3. At paragraph 157 of the report, Ms Ferrari says:

"In relation to his pre-existing ADHD, core symptoms of ADHD including impulsivity, emotional impulsiveness, mood instability, and low self-control have been proposed as predisposing an individual such as Mr Dattoli to criminal offences."

4. And there is reference to relevant literature. Ms Ferrari goes on at paragraph 158 to say:

"These factors inherent in his ADHD and his chronic self-medication with substances at the time, can be considered in the context of his offending. He engaged in impulsive, risk-taking behaviour, was reckless and careless as to the consequences of his actions due to his depressed mental state, was abusing methamphetamine daily, which further impaired his mental health and decision-making, and failed to consider the nature and quality of his conduct in the moment of the offence".

5. The second report provided to the Court is a report of Dr Nicholas Hughes, a consultant forensic psychiatrist, who assessed you in November of this year.[15]. It is necessary to refer briefly to his response to questions that he was asked about the application of the so-called Verdins[16] principles to you. I will refer to paragraphs a, e and f which appear at pages 6-7 of the report.
6. The first question that Dr Hughes was asked was whether or not the circumstances of your case give rise to Verdins limb 1: that is, a reduction in your moral culpability, thereby affecting the punishment that is just in the circumstances. Dr Hughes expresses the following opinion:

"Mr Dattoli has plead guilty to a lengthy list of offences over an extended period, and thus any mental health problem considered must have been active over that entire duration. It is my opinion that Mr Dattoli clearly meets diagnostic criteria for ADHD as set out in [DSM-5]".

"Mr Dattoli lives with an internal restlessness and significantly reduced ability to measure his behavioural responses in comparison to those without ADHD, however this impulsiveness is only part of his behavioural choices - and ultimately it is my opinion that the degree of reduction in moral culpability is not of such significance to meet criteria for a mental impairment defence (as seen in major mood or psychotic disorders)".[17]

8. Turning to Verdins limb 5, Dr Hughes expresses the opinion that this is of significance for you, and he concurs with the opinions formulated within Ms Ferrari's report. He states:

"Mr Dattoli is currently unable to access his medication for ADHD due to severe under-resourcing of prison mental health services and despite numerous requests, has been unable to advocate for himself to be seen by a psychiatrist."

9. Finally, in relation to Verdins limb 6, Dr Hughes expresses the view that you are keen to enter the next phase of your life after you are released from prison; however, you accept that you are facing a lengthy custodial sentence. He states:

"I support the notion of his mental health being taken into consideration when imposing the length of his possible parole period, as I believe that the nature of his ADHD and its impact on his offending would benefit from a longer period of parole as this would provide a structured and monitored transition period to the community".

10. In light of the medical material before the Court, I have reduced your sentence by a modest extent in relation to limb 1 of Verdins, and more significantly in relation to Verdins limbs 5 and 6.

1. This was clearly very serious offending. Drugs such as methylamphetamine do untold damage to society as this court sees on a daily basis. You sought to profit from the misery. As the prosecutor Mr Pickering submitted, this was not street corner trafficking to feed a habit. While you have had your own struggles with drug addiction, the evidence before the court indicates that you have been running a drug trafficking business for profit.
2. General deterrence and community protection are of the utmost importance in a case such as this.
3. In the case of Dawid v DPP, Kaye AJA explained that:

... it is important that persons ... who contemplate embarking on [drug trafficking] do so in the clear knowledge that, if detected, they will be sentenced to lengthy terms of imprisonment.[18]

4. The sentence I impose must be 'sufficiently severe to offset the lure of large and relatively easy profits, which can be derived from the trafficking of illicit drugs'.[19]
5. In light of your criminal record, specific deterrence is also an important consideration.
6. The other relevant sentencing purposes are punishment and the promotion of your rehabilitation. I have set a non-parole period to achieve this latter purpose.

(a) On charge 1, prohibited person possess a silencer, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment.

(b) On charge 2, unauthorised possession of a trafficable quantity of unregistered firearms, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.

(c) On charge 3, Trafficking in a drug of dependence - commercial quantity, you are convicted and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.

(d) On charge 4, Possession of a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment.

(e) On charge 5, Possession of a precursor chemical, you are convicted and sentenced to 9 months imprisonment.

(a) On charge 1, of common assault, you are convicted and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment.

(b) On charge 2, trafficking in a drug of dependence (methylamphetamine)- commercial quantity, you are convicted and sentenced to 8 years imprisonment.

(c) On charge 3, trafficking in a drug of dependence (1, 4, Bt) - commercial quantity, you are convicted and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.

(d) On charge 4, possessing a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 months imprisonment.

(e) On charge 5, recklessly dealing with proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.

(f) On charge 6, possession of identification information, you are convicted and sentenced to 9 months imprisonment.

(a) On summary charge 11, contravene conduct condition on bail, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment.;

(b) On summary charge 16, possessing cartridge ammunition whilst not holding a firearms licence, you are convicted and sentenced to a fine of $300;

(c) On summary charge 18, possessing a prohibited weapon without an exemption, you are convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment.

(d) On summary charge 25, dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime, you are convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment.

(e) On summary charge 26, commit indictable offence whilst on bail, you are convicted and sentenced to 1 month imprisonment; and

(f) On summary charge 27, fail to comply with a direction under a warrant, you are convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment..

1. I have approached the questions of cumulation and concurrency by first determining a total effective sentence on the second indictment (R10457020) as this includes the more serious offending. In so doing, I am mindful that you are to be sentenced as a 'serious offender' within the meaning of Part 2A of the SA in relation to the trafficking commercial quantity charges (i.e. charges 3 on the first indictment and charges 2 and 3 on the second indictment).
2. Therefore, in imposing sentence in respect of these charges, I must consider protection of the community as the principal sentencing purpose.[20] The prosecution did not seek a disproportionate sentence and I will not impose one. Every term of imprisonment must be served cumulatively on each other unless I order otherwise.[21] This is to be done having regard to totality.[22] Finally, the court must record that you were sentenced as a serious offender.[23]
3. On indictment R10457020, the base sentence of 8 years' imprisonment, is that imposed on charge 2. I order that 12 months of the sentence on charge 3, one month of the sentence on charge 1, 3 months of the sentence on charge 5 and 2 months of the sentence on charge 6 be served cumulatively on the base sentence and on each other. The sentence imposed for charge 4 is wholly concurrent.
4. The total effective sentence for indictment no R10457020 is therefore 9 years and 6 months imprisonment.
5. I have then used this sentence as the base sentence for the purposes of determining appropriate orders for cumulation and concurrency as between the 2 indictments and the related summary offences.
6. On indictment N11661228.B, I order that 12 months of the sentence on charge 3, 6 months of the charge 1 sentence, 6 months of the charge 2 sentence and 2 months of the sentence on charge 5 be served cumulatively on the base sentence and on each other. The charge 4 sentence is to be served concurrently.
7. Turning to the related summary offences, one month of the sentences imposed on each of summary offences 18, 25 and 27 is also to be served cumulatively on the base sentence and on each other. The remaining summary sentences are to be served wholly concurrently.
8. The total effective sentence is therefore 11 years and 11 months
9. You will be eligible for parole when you have served 7 years and 4 months.
10. I declare pursuant to section 18 of the Sentencing Act that the period of 131 days accrued on Indictment N11661228.B and 285 days on Indictment R10457020 (totalling 416 days), not including today, be reckoned as having been served under the sentence the court imposes today.
11. Pursuant to section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act, had you pleaded not guilty to the charges, the head sentence would have been 15 years and the non-parole period would have been 10 years.
12. I make the ancillary orders sought noting that they are not opposed.
13. The records of the court will reflect that you have been sentenced as a serious offender in respect of the three commercial quantity trafficking charges.[24]

[2] Young v The King [2024] VSCA 197 ('Young').

[3] Berichon v The Queen [2013] VSCA 319.

[5] Psychiatric Report prepared by Dr Nicholas Hughes dated 21 November 2025, 6 ('Hughes Report').

[6] DPP v Dattoli [2015] VCC 1195 ('Dattoli').

[8] Psychological Report written by Carla Ferrari dated 27 November 2024, 19 [164]; [161]

[9] Gregory (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2017] VSCA 151, 31 [98].

[10] DPP v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41; See DPP v Condo [2019] VSCA 181 at [20] and Lytras v The Queen [2020] VSCA 150 at [58]; See also more recently Gioffre v The King [2025] VSCA 273 at [44] ('Gioffre').

[13] DPP v Taing [2019] VCC 1738.

[14] DPP v Money [2021] VCC 1982.

[16] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269.

[18] [2013] VSCA 64, 12 [35].

[20] Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 6D(a) ('Sentencing Act')..

[21] Ibid s 6E.

[22] DPP v Hum (a pseudonym) [2022] VSCA 57, 30 [134].

[24] Charge 3 on Indictment N11661228.B and charges 2 and 3 on Indictment R10457020.