[2025] VCC 1198
General information, not legal advice.
County Court of Victoria
2025-08-21
Original judgment source is linked above.
Sentence: A term of imprisonment for a period of three years, with a non-parole period of 20 months
6AAA: A term of imprisonment for a period of five years, with a non-parole period of three and a half years
Personal circumstances and other subjective matters
[1] The detailed circumstances of offending are set out in the Prosecution Opening on Plea (22 July 2025, Exhibit P1). I have also considered the submissions of the parties and tendered material, including the defence outline of plea submissions (15 July 2025, Exhibit D1); Amanda Brown, rehabilitation report (3 February 2025, Exhibit D2); and bundle of character references (Exhibit D3).
[2] Given the quantity and other circumstances (see Prosecution Opening, [11]-[12]), the defence accepted that I could not be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the offence was not committed by Mr Hamilton for any purpose relating to trafficking: see s 73(1)(b) and (c). I am not.
[3] Given the quantity and circumstances, the prosecution accepted that I could be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the offence was not committed by Mr Hamilton for any purpose relating to trafficking: see s 73(1)(b). I am.
[4] For sentencing factors relevant to possession of firearms offending, see Berichon v The Queen [2013] VSCA 319; (2013) 40 VR 490 at [26] (Redlich JA); DPP v Basic [2017] VSCA 376 at [81]- [88] and [94]-[97] (Weinberg, Osborn and Priest JJA); and DPP v Graoroski [2018] VSCA 332 at [34]- [36] (Maxwell P, T Forrest and Weinberg JJA).
[5] The specific firearms are set out in the particulars to charge 3 in indictment P12642102 (as amended on the day of the plea hearing). Not all of the firearms were complete.
[6] This is evidenced by the Signal messages found on your phone: Depositions, Exhibit 79. Although the probable inference is that you had sold firearms, I cannot be satisfied (beyond reasonable doubt) of this fact.
[7] I have taken these cases into account:
• DPP v Symons [2022] VCC 1471 (Judge Rozen, one year imprisonment): two firearms; not used for criminal offending; lengthy criminal history including similar offending; some Verdins; youth.
• DPP v Jeanes [2024] VCC 273 (Judge Marich, three years six months imprisonment): 11 firearms; loaded and accessible; motive of financial gain; limited criminal history.
• DPP v Vipond [2025] VCC 81 (Judge Tiwana, 20 months imprisonment): four loaded firearms; insecurely stored; purpose was for own security; limited criminal history; delay.
[8] However, I do not accept that these consequences of your offending amount to exceptional family hardship: Markovic v The Queen [2010] VSCA 105; Carabott v The King [2025] VSCA 118.
[9] Charge 3. In my view, all of the offending can be said to have been founded on the same facts: Sentencing Act 1991, s 9(1). It is, therefore, open to me to impose a single aggregate sentence. However, given the significant differences between the various types of offences I find that it is more appropriate to aggregate them in groups of thematically related offending.
[10] Charge 4 and related summary offences 18, 19 and 26.
DPP
Hamilton [2025] VCC 1198
(2013) 40 VR 490