DPP v Robson [2026] VCC 416

(a) 'Frank Gutter sustained a traumatic brain injury associated with a skull fracture due to blunt force impact to the back of the head. The absence of documented injury elsewhere on the body including the face does not exclude blunt force elsewhere.

(b) The injury was life-threatening. The bleeding expanded over a period of time, such that on 22 June 2024 there was a reduction in consciousness and emergency neurosurgery was required. Were it not for this neurosurgery he would have died from the brain injury.

(c) The injury was highly medically significant. It required neurosurgery, intensive care and multidisciplinary support. The length of post-traumatic amnesia (35 days, much greater than the defining threshold of seven days) would categorise this traumatic brain injury in the most severe category.

(d) The recovery period is likely to take many months to years. In October 2024 he was still awaiting further neurosurgery. It is in fact quite likely that he will not regain his prior function and may be dependent on the support of others to engage in daily activities.'

1. CCTV showed you on Anthony Street, Melbourne, after your offending, exiting the vehicle which was displaying cloned registration BIC 490, which makes for Summary Offence 3.
2. On 11 July 2024 you were observed walking along Grattan Street, Parkville where you were arrested. You were found in possession of keys to the stolen Audi (Charge 2, theft) and a bottle of GHB (Charge 3, possession of drug of dependence). In the car police located the cloned registration plates (Summary Charge 3, fraudulently use registration plates), five white diazepam pills (Charge 4, possess drug of dependence) and a lunchbox containing vials of anabolic steroids (Charge 5, possess drug of dependence).

1. This is plainly very serious offending.
2. A period of only 22 seconds elapsed between you getting out of the car and returning to it, during which you caused truly catastrophic injuries to Mr Gutter.
3. I accept your offending was of short duration and was spontaneous, but you have pleaded guilty to recklessly causing serious injury and thus you foresaw the probability that your actions in pushing Mr Gutter, after having punched him to the head, would cause him serious injury.
4. The injuries suffered by Mr Gutter were life threatening and the consequences will be lifelong. He requires full time care and is completely dependent on his wife and carers.
5. I consider the starting point for your moral culpability to be high.
6. You counsel submitted that as you rounded the corner you clipped Mr Gutter. There is no evidence of this before the court, but should it have happened, it in no way makes your response understandable or acceptable.

1. I received a victim impact statement from Mr Frank Gutter, penned with the assistance of his wife and a carer.
2. Mr Gutter's life has completely changed, and he is not the same person he previously was. His emotional regulation has been devastated, he has nightmares, emotional breakdowns and reduced memory. He has had numerous surgeries and after the offending displayed suicidal ideation.
3. Mr Gutter has lost his ability to work, play guitar, write songs and use a computer. He is often distressed, isolated and anxious, such that he no longer enjoys his usual social activities.
4. I further received a victim impact statement from Ms Terri Simpson, Mr Gutter's wife. She eloquently described the trauma of his undergoing emergency surgery: 'The emotional impact on my family was intense and I have never cried so much in my life.' She had to break the news of his condition to his family in Germany. While she is grateful that Mr Gutter is still with her, they are now navigating a new life in which Mr Gutter 'can't be left by himself, has an ongoing acquired brain injury, no memory, needs care and will never live as before.'
5. Plainly, the impact of your offending has been tremendous. Frank Gutter's life and that of his loved ones have been irreparably damaged by your actions. I take this into account, but I must be careful not to give the injures excessive weight.

1. You sought a sentence indication, which did not proceed, on the charge of causing serious injury recklessly, in July 2025, before making a formal offer to plead to this charge in October 2025. While not at the earliest stage, I accept that there is utility in your plea. You have saved the court and the community the time and expense of running a trial, and more importantly, you have spared your victim, his wife and other witnesses the ordeal of giving evidence before a jury. As such you have facilitated the administration of justice, and you are entitled to a benefit for that.
2. By your plea of guilty you have demonstrated an acceptance of responsibility for your offending, together with some remorse. I note that there is no evidence of remorse beyond that inherent in the plea.

1. I turn now to your personal circumstances.
2. You are now 34 years of age, having been born in November 1991. You have an older sister.
3. I did not receive a psychological report detailing your personal history and little was submitted about your personal circumstances.
4. I heard evidence from your mother, Donna Rainey, to which I will return, that you were regularly exposed to alcohol consumption as a child and from the age of about 11 to domestic violence perpetrated by your father towards your mother and towards you.
5. You engaged in self-harm and your mother found you holding a noose at the age of 16.
6. At 16 you also began smoking methamphetamine, progressing to GHB use in your mid-20s. You used methamphetamine until the time of your remand, but I received a number of clear drug screens dated November 2025 to March 2026.
7. At 16 years of age, you first left home and couch surfed with friends for a period of three months before you returned home. You have been homeless several times since.
8. You ceased formal education in the first semester of Year 11. You have held a number of trade jobs, and you had your own plastering business for some 10 years.
9. You maintain a good relationship with your mother who was present in court to support you.
10. While remanded in custody you have engaged in a number of courses including the Diffuse, Changing Gears, Ice and Me and Know the Score programs. You are also a billet, a position of responsibility within the prison population.

1. You have a number of prior criminal convictions which include assault, drug and weapons offences, amongst others. While you are not to be punished for these offences again, they do inform specific deterrence and your prospects of rehabilitation.
2. I consider that you must be specifically deterred from offending such as this by the imposition of a lengthy sentence of imprisonment.
3. Similarly, members of the public minded to act in this way, committing unprovoked acts of violence, must see by the sentence I impose on you that stern sentences of imprisonment will follow.
4. I also consider just punishment and denunciation to be relevant sentencing considerations, and I take them into account.
5. It was submitted by Ms Hart on your behalf that the principles in Bugmy v The Queen[1] are applicable in your case, in a general rather than a specific sense, given your exposure to alcohol abuse as a child and domestic violence as an

11-to-16- year- old. These principles contemplate a background of deprivation that may compromise a person's capacity to mature and to learn from experience. 6. I heard evidence from your mother that she would drink to excess on weekends and your father would drink to excess daily while you were growing up. She gave evidence that there was verbal and physical violence in the home on at least a fortnightly basis from the time you were about 11. She said you would try to intervene when she was being hit, and your father would on occasion hit you. As I have already indicated, she found you holding a noose when you were 16, which she told the court you said was in response to the abuse from your father. 7. These factors were disputed by the prosecution. Ms Fallar, appearing for the Director, submitted that while relevant to the sentencing synthesis, your experience of childhood deprivation does not reach the heights of Bugmy. I consider that some moderation of your moral culpability is appropriate. Your moral culpability is modestly reduced as compared with that of an offender whose formative years were not so marred. 8. Your compromised capacity to mature and learn from experience in turn elevates the need for community protection. Members of the public must be protected from you, a need demonstrated by the instant offending. 9. I do not have an assessment of your future risk of violence, but I note the unprovoked and violent nature of the instant offending. 10. Ms Hart submitted that delay is relevant to you in that you have had the matter hanging over your head for some time, particularly in the six months since you first indicated a plea of guilty, and that you have been able to demonstrate your efforts at rehabilitation over the intervening period. 11. As I have indicated, you have completed several courses in custody. I consider your prospects of rehabilitation to be guarded given your criminal history, your history of drug use and the nature of this offending. Your rehabilitation is contingent on you receiving and meaningfully engaging with treatment for drug addiction. 12. I further apply the principle of totality. I moderate the cumulation between the charges before me so as to impose a sentence that is proportionate to your overall conduct.

1. Both parties submitted that the only available sentence is one involving a head sentence and a non-parole period.
2. Ms Hart did not refer me to any authorities. Ms Fallar referred me to R v Pota [2007] VSCA 198, a case that went to trial where the offender was acquitted of manslaughter and intentionally causing serious injury and convicted of recklessly causing serious injury in the alternative.
3. I have considered a number of sentences for recklessly causing serious injury. Current sentencing practices show that the scope of sentences imposed for this offence is wide.

1. Mr Robson, would you please stand.
2. On Charge 1, recklessly causing serious injury, you are sentenced to five years' imprisonment.
3. On Charge 2, theft, you are sentenced to nine months' imprisonment.
4. On Charges 3, 4 and 5, each a charge of possession of a drug of dependence, you are sentence to an aggregate one-month imprisonment.
5. On related Summary Offence 2, driving while disqualified, you are sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
6. On related Summary Offence 3, fraudulently using a registration label, you are sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment.
7. I direct that Charge 1 be the base sentence.
8. I direct that three months of the sentence imposed on Charge 2 and one month of the sentence imposed on Summary Offence 2 be served cumulatively on each other and on the sentences imposed on Charge 1.
9. That makes a total effective sentence of five years and four months' imprisonment.
10. For the avoidance of doubt, there is no cumulation imposed on the aggregate sentence imposed on Charges 3, 4 and 5 or on the sentence imposed on related Summary Offence 3.
11. I direct that you serve a minimum non-parole period of three years and six months before being eligible for parole.
12. Pursuant to s18 of the Sentencing Act 1991, I declare that you have served 508 days by way of pre-sentence detention, excluding today.
13. Pursuant to s89 of the Sentencing Act 1991, on the charge of theft of a motor vehicle, I direct that your licence be cancelled and disqualified for a period of six months from today.
14. Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, I declare that had you not pleaded guilty, the sentence I would have imposed would have been a total effective sentence of seven years and six months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years.
15. You may be seated Mr Robson.
16. MS FALLAR: As the court pleases, thank you.
17. HER HONOUR: Is there anything further Ms Fallar.
18. MS FALLAR: No, Your Honour.
19. HER HONOUR: Mr Gilfillan.
20. MR GILFILLAN: No, Your Honour.
21. HER HONOUR: Thank you, you can take Mr Robson out. We will adjourn until 10.30.