DPP v Sage [2025] VCC 1012

Sentence: Total effective sentence of 2 years, 10 months, non-parole period of

1. Ricky Sage, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of theft of a motor vehicle, one charge of aggravated offence of recklessly exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving and one charge of retention of stolen goods.
2. You also agreed to this Court hearing, and pleaded guilty to, summary charges of driving unlicensed (charge 7) and commit an indictable offence on bail (charge 9).

1. The circumstances of your offending are outlined in the prosecution opening, dated 19 December 2023 and marked as Exhibit A.

1. On the 13th of July 2022 at 3:00 AM, Ms Wink parked her 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee in her driveway in Oak Street, Beaumaris. The next morning at around 7am she noticed that her vehicle had been stolen form the driveway by unknown offender/s. Her car keys were in her home and it is unknown how the offenders stole the vehicle.

Charge 3 - Handling stolen goods - rolled up charge

1. On the 23rd of July 2022, Mr Mills dropped his 2013 Jeep Cherokee, white in colour, with Victorian registration commencing in 1UG at the 4WD Workshop in Seaford at around 5pm so that it could be repaired. He parked in the customer carpark at the front of the premises which can be accessed from Hartnett Drive.

1. The following day, being the 24th of July 2022, a mechanic who works at the Workshop, noticed the registration plates of the vehicle had been stolen by unknown offender/s. He called the police to report the incident.

Charge 2 - aggravated offence of recklessly exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving

1. On Wednesday the 26th of July 2022 at 10:00 PM, First Constable Harrison Waters (FC Waters)[1] and Senior Constable Nona Maxwell (SC Maxwell)[2] were conducting nightshift divisional van duties.
2. At 3:46 AM, a Mr Bailey was asleep at his home address in Admirals Court Frankston when he was awoken by his dogs barking. He looked out his bedroom window and observed two males walking along Admirals Court holding torches. The two males were looking into vehicles. Mr Bailey called '000' at 3:47 AM to report the incident.
3. At 3:48 am, officers Waters and Maxwell received the job via Police Communications. At 4:00 AM, they arrived at Admirals Court, Frankston. SC Maxwell was the driver of the police vehicle and FC Waters was seated in the front passenger seat. They exited the police vehicle and were approached by Mr Bailey who stated that the two males had torches and were on foot, walking towards Aquarius Drive.
4. The officers then returned to their divisional van and commenced patrolling for the two males. They drove east on Aquarius Drive which is a large looping road with small Courts running off it. At 4:15 AM, SC Maxwell turned right into Schooner Bay Drive and observed a white Jeep Grand Cherokee parked on the right side of the road. The vehicle was facing south-east, the engine was running, and the headlights were on.
5. SC Maxwell parked the divisional van head-on to the Jeep. The Jeep had black, stolen slimline registration plates attached to the vehicle, commencing with AET_._ The officers observed two males seated inside the vehicle - one in the driver's seat and one in the front passenger seat. The driver's side door was wide open. FC Waters told SC Maxwell that he would go to the driver's door.
6. He got out of the divisional van and yelled at the driver "turn the car off". The driver yelled back the question "why?". FC Waters yelled back "turn the fucking car off". The driver said "I can't".
7. FC Waters walked towards the Jeep and noticed that the driver's side window was down. He got within a metre of the driver and directed the driver to turn the car off. The driver just stared back at him. FC Waters was within arm's reach of the driver and got a good look at him and provided a detailed description, as outlined in the opening. While he could not recall the driver's name he realised he recognised him. You were the driver.
8. FC Waters looked into the car for the car keys but could not see them. He put his hand in and touched around where the ignition should be but couldn't feel anything. It was at this point that he realised it must be one of the more modern cars that are started with a fob instead of a key.
9. At some point, FC Waters attention was drawn to the passenger because he said something, that he could not hear, to you in a very low voice. He did not get a good look at the passenger but provides a description, as outlined in the opening.
10. FC Waters yelled at you to get out of the car. Hedescribes you as staring wide eyed and as 'frozen'. Initially he thought you would comply.
11. FC Waters opened the driver's side door of the Jeep and yelled for you to get out of the car. You continued to stare at him so he reached in and grabbed you with both of his hands. The bottom half of your body was still facing forwards but your upper body was twisted slightly towards FC Waters whose hands grabbed and held onto your hoodie on your right shoulder and chest area.
12. FC Waters tried to pull you out, but you quickly pulled your body away from himwhich caused him to lose grip. The passenger then yelled "let's go, drive, drive, drive". At this point FC Waters was within a ruler's length of you. As soon as the passenger yelled at you to drive, FC Waters saw that your demeanour changed and you seemed to transition, as he described it, from "freeze" to "fight".
13. FC Waters saw your right leg bend and raise. You jerked your leg quickly like you were slamming your foot on the pedal. A wave of fear immediately went through FC Waters body as he realised that he was in serious trouble. He tried to think quickly because he genuinely thought he was going to die if he did not do something.
14. FC Waters grabbed on to your chest area and held on for 'dear life'. In a matter of milliseconds, the car started to move backwards and FC Waters felt his left leg get swept from under him. He had a small amount of stability with his right foot and used this to jump up off the ground and into the Jeep. He placed his right foot in the drivers footwell and his left foot was on the edge of the plastic strip that runs across the doorway adjacent to the driver's seat. His body was sort of hunched over you.
15. The Jeep reversed at rapid speed, with FC Waters holding on. The door was still open and FC Waters started to think that he needed to dive as far as he could out of the door and that he would need to bring his legs up to his torso when he landed so the tyres did not run over them. The car moved rapidly. He felt that diving out of the car was the safer option as when jumping out he could try and control his exit out of the vehicle as opposed to being flung out when the car was driving at a faster speed on a main road. He recalls being terrified and that there was a high chance that he would be seriously injured.
16. FC Waters could not recall exactly how far the Jeep reversed but he could feel it moving quickly. He braced himself and dived out the driver's door as far as he could. He hit the asphalt and immediately brought his legs up to the rest of his body to protect them. The right side of his body hit the asphalt first and took the brunt of the fall. The impact caused his head to ricochet and the hit the asphalt. The door went over the top of him but didn't make contact.
17. As the Jeep went past him, he rolled over and stood up so he could see where the car was and to make sure it was not about to run him over. The car continued for approximately another 20 metres and reversed up a small driveway. It collided with a parked Holden Colorado with Victorian registration commencing AQE, belonging to a known owner (Stanley). The impact of the collision projected the Holden Colorado into the garage door, causing major damage.
18. The vehicle then drove forward and accelerated quickly in a north-westerly direction along Schooner Bay Drive.
19. SC Maxwell then yelled out to FC Waters and asked him if he was OK. FC Waters grabbed the right side of his head and realised he was bleeding. He then checked all over his body to make sure he was still 'intact'. His heart was racing and he felt adrenaline pumping through his body.
20. A short time later, the occupants of the house with the damaged car and garage came out and also offered FC Waters some assistance. His head was throbbing and he could feel two lumps on the side of his head.
21. FC Waters walked back to the police vehicle and sat on the nature strip, waiting for an ambulance to arrive. It was at this point, that he remembered your name and identified you, in turn advising Police Communications.
22. At 4:38 AM, Closed Circuit Television footage from an address at Maple Street in Seaford, captures the Jeep Cherokee driving east on Maple Street which is a dead-end street. The Jeep was parked and abandoned in the vicinity. All the windows were left wound down.
23. At around 4:45 am, FC Waters was conveyed to the Frankston Hospital. As a result of the incident, he sustained the following injuries:

(a) Grazing and cuts to the right-hand side of his body

(b) Grazing and cuts to his head

(c) Bruising to left leg

(d) Grazing and cuts to both shoulders

1. At 11:00 PM on 27 July 2022 the Jeep Cherokee bearing registration plates commencing AET was located and recovered by police outside at the Maple Street, Seaford address.
2. The vehicle was towed to All Car Towing in Frankston to be forensically examined by Crime Scene Officers.
3. On 28July 2022, LSC Kent[3] attended All Car Towing in Frankston and Forensically examined the white Jeep Cherokee bearing registration plates commencing AET, which were stolen plates (Charge 3 - retention of stolen goods). LSC Kent ocated three of your fingerprints on the rear-view mirror.
4. LSC Kent seized the following items from inside the vehicle:

(a) Registration plates, commencing 1UG - Stolen from Seaford on 24 July 2022 (Charge 3 - retention of stolen goods)

(b) Registration plates commencing, KNM - Stolen from Dandenong South on 20 July 2022. (Charge 3 - retention of stolen goods)

1. On 29 July 2022 at 8:10 AM, police attended an address of a relative of yours at Cane Mews, Seaford, a short distance from where the Jeep was abandoned. You were located and arrested.

1. Police located a Shell fuel card on the coffee table, next to the couch where you had been sleeping. The card, ending in '1598 was found to have been stolen. (charge 3 - retention of stolen goods). You were conveyed to the Frankston Police Complex to be formally interviewed. You made a no comment interview and refused to have your DNA taken, with a swab subsequently being taken on formal authority being approved.

1. When you drove the Jeep Cherokee on 27 July 2022 on (a highway) namely Schooner Bay Drive, Frankston, you did so without being the holder of a driver licence or permit authorising you to drive such motor vehicle and without being exempt from holding such licence or permit under the regulations **(**as per notice of related summary offence - charge 7).

1. When you committed charge 2 on the indictment, being the indictable offence of Aggravated Reckless Exposure of Police Officer to Risk by Driving (Stolen Motor Vehicle), you did so whilst you were on bail (as per notice of related summary offence - charge 9).

1. Officer Waters provided a victim impact statement to the Court in which he powerfully articulates the impact of your offending. He states that at the time of the offending 'I was performing duties the community would expect of me, to hold offenders to account and prevent crime. My duties on this night unfortunately found myself to face a near death experience which has significantly impacted me to this day.'
2. He speaks of the many 'personal and emotional challenges' he has experienced as a result of this incident. He has had significant difficulty sleeping, as he experiences flashbacks and trauma, which continue to burden him. He has suffered profound stress and anxiety which has impacted all facets of his life, including his relationships and work. He also refers to the multiple scars caused by the incident which serves, he states, 'as a constant reminder of an event I want to forget.'
3. I take into account the impact of your offending on your victim.

1. Your offending is inherently serious. In particular, charge 2 is serious, as indicated by its maximum penalty of 10 years. Also, as agreed between Counsel, it is a category 2 offence, requiring the imposition of a custodial order unless an exception applies pursuant to s.5(2H)(a)-(e) of the Sentencing Act. No such submission has been advanced on your behalf and on my independent assessment I do not consider an exception to be enlivened in your case.
2. In respect of charge 2, general deterrence looms large in offending of this nature. It is simply unacceptable that emergency service workers, such as FC Waters, are exposed to such risk in the course of their employment. This law was designed to send a clear message to those who deliberately harm frontline workers that such violence will not be tolerated (premier). In fact, you should not have been driving on the day at all, as you were unlicenced at the time (summary offence). As already noted, your offending was also clearly impactful, causing considerable harm.
3. In all the circumstances, I accept the submission of your Counsel that your offending was impulsive and spontaneous. I also take into account that it did not involve driving over a prolonged episode on busy roads. In this context, your Counsel submits that the vehicle was not travelling 'at high speed'. On the agreed summary though you did reverse the car at 'rapid speed'. Even though you may not have been travelling at high speed as described for example in cases such as Steven Nelson v the Queen[4] , your Counsel accepted that it would have been no less terrifying for officer Waters.
4. Your Counsel submits that your offending on this charge can be distinguished from the more serious circumstances of Nelson v The Queen.[5] The prosecution submit that your offending is more serious.
5. Overall, the offending in the case of Nelson[6] was more serious, as reflected in the many diverse charges before the Court and the period of the offending. The offending included a rolled-up charge of aggravated reckless exposure of emergency worker to risk by driving, representing the endangerment of six police officers. Four police officers told the appellant not to move and instead he entered his vehicle and drove off quickly. The members were beside the appellant's vehicle and attempting to open the doors. They were forced to jump back from the vehicle as it took off. A second police vehicle with two other members was parked in the vicinity and activated its lights and sirens. The appellant veered to the wrong side of the road, colliding with the front passenger side of the police vehicle, causing minimal damage, and then hit another car which was parked on the side of the road (at [13] and [14]). The appellant was also unlicenced and on bail at the time and had a criminal history described as 'appalling'. He was able to call in aid a number of mitigating factors, as outlined at paragraph [30] of the decision.
6. It is difficult to undertake a strict comparison between two cases. In Nelson's case, importantly the charge was a rolled up one, where 6 officers were exposed to risk. Officers attempting to open the door of the vehicle had to jump back from it as it took off and it then veered onto the wrong side of the road, colliding with another police car. In your case, one officer was exposed to risk and your driving did not involve veering onto wrong sides of the road or colliding with police vehicles. Having said that, FC Waters had reached into the car and was a 'ruler's length' from you when you slammed your foot on the pedal. His body was hunched over you, to gain some balance, as you rapidly reversed. He was exposed to significant risk and to avoid potentially further risk or harm he dived out of the car and you continued to drive away. He also suffered (minor) physical injuries, as outlined in the prosecution opening. Therefore, while I accept your counsel's submission that there are some aspects of Nelson's case that can properly be distinguished, your offending on this charge is also plainly serious.
7. The case of McKay involved overall offending of a greater magnitude and scale, aptly described by the sentencing judge as a 'eight-hour offending rampage' (at [15])[7]. The basis for charge 9, that is the aggravated reckless exposure of emergency worker to risk by driving, was that the police had attempted to 'box in' the appellant. Instead of surrendering himself he entered the stolen motor vehicle and drove away. In doing so, he collided with two police vehicles. The driving was at a relatively low speed as the appellant sought to move from a stationary position at a petrol station (at [38]). The Court of appeal found that there were a number of significant distinguishing features with the case of Nelson which suggested that the appellant's sentence of 3 years imprisonment was outside the applicable range. Instead, having regard to the nature of the offending and the powerful Bugmy considerations in the case, they imposed a sentence of 2 years imprisonment on the charge[8]. The objective circumstances in McKay's case on charge 9 are open to be viewed as less serious than yours. I do however note that the charge was also a rolled-up one, covering the risk to which the appellant's driving exposed four police officers (one of whom suffered a shoulder tear though no serious injury) and the appellant was on bail.
8. I take into account the general landscape for offending of this nature and the cases have offered considerable guidance. However, as always, each case turns on its own facts and circumstances.
9. Charge 1 was committed on the same day and was the stolen vehicle you were driving at the time of, and the subject of, charge 2. Any sentence must reflect the separate criminality involved in theft of the motor vehicle, along with the totality principle, given the close and overlapping nature of the offences.
10. Charge 3 is a rolled-up charge and I take into account the full circumstances of your offending.
11. I also take into account as an aggravating feature that you were on bail at the time of the offending though I do note that this is the subject of a separate charge. Complete concurrency will be ordered on this charge to avoid the risk of double punishment.

1. Your case has a lengthy and chequered history.
2. As already noted, you were arrested on 29 July 2022. You were remanded in custody. On 15 November 2022 you were granted bail onto CISP. On 16 January 2023 you were remanded on unrelated matters of informant Silk. On 2 February 2023 your bail was revoked on this matter. On 3 April 2023 you were sentenced to four months imprisonment in the Magistrates Court for the matters of Informant Silk. On 31 January 2023 this sentence lapsed. On 18 December 2023 the current matter resolved to a plea of guilty. On 19 March 2024 you were granted bail to reside at Oydssey House. On 5 July 2024 you exited from Odyssey House due to breaching a rule pertaining to intimate relationships. On 18 July 2024 your bail was varied to allow you to reside in the community. Between 19 July to 28 July 2024 you committed further offending on matters of informant Anderson, Low, Hill and Rampal. On 28 August 2024 you failed to appear on this matter. On 29 September 2024 a warrant was executed and you were remanded in custody where you have since remained. On 20 February 2025 your plea on this matter proceeded and the presiding Judge determined that it was appropriate for your case to be referred to and determined by another Judge. On 14 March 2025 you were sentenced to 14 days imprisonment on all the outstanding matters but for the matter of informant Low (Low listed on 10 July 2025). On 4 July 2025 the case was re-listed for a plea of guilty.
3. As to presentence detention, referable to this matter, it is agreed between Counsel that you have a total of 751 days.

1. While you did not enter a plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity your plea is still important and entitles you to a discount in sentence. It has utilitarian value and indicates your willingness to facilitate the course of justice and accept responsibility for your offending. I also accept that your plea of guilty is indicative of remorse. You told consultant psychologist Mr Ian Mackinnon 'I never intended to hurt him. I am sorry ... He's a young man, he didn't deserve that. I hope he's okay.' You also provided a letter to the Court where you indicate that you have reflected on your crimes and the impact on your victims.

1. Your personal circumstances were outlined by your Counsel and are canvassed in the report of Mr Mackinnon of 17 November 2024.
2. You are a 31 year old Aboriginal man. You were aged 28 at the time of the offending.
3. Your background is one of significant disadvantage and disruption. You were raised by your mother and stepfather in the Cranbourne and Mornington areas, frequently moving around. You have three stepsisters and two stepbrothers. Your mother struggled with heroin dependency and your father was a violent alcoholic. In this context, you were exposed to frequent episodes of domestic violence during your formative years and frequently neglected. On several occasions, you were placed in crisis care/foster care. From the age of 13 you often stayed away from home, couch surfing with friends.
4. You reported to Mr Mackinnon that you only met your biological father once and for the first time when you were 16 years of age.
5. You reported enjoying a very close relationship with one of your mother's brothers. He was an important and positive role model for you. He tragically died in a motor vehicle accident in 2012.
6. Your mother continues to struggle and to battle substance addiction. You have an ongoing and close relationship with her, but you tend to avoid visiting her as her substance abuse has triggered your own relapses in the past. You enjoy close relationships with three of your siblings. One of your sisters was kidnapped over a year ago which attracted considerable media attention and caused you distress.
7. Growing up you attended several schools. You left high school during Year 10. You reported to Mr Mackinnon possessing only basic English literacy skills. Subsequently you completed Certificate II in Civil Construction. You worked as a door-to-door salesperson selling auto parts when you were around 18 years of age. Over the last decade you have 'just done a bit of labouring here and there.'
8. You have a relevant and extensive criminal history, including for dishonesty matters, driving offences, resisting police, recklessly cause injury offences and reckless conduct endangering serious injury and committing offences on bail. You have been sentenced to a variety of dispositions, including terms of imprisonment with non-parole periods.
9. In terms of your mental and medical health, you have a history of acting upon deliberate self-harming and suicidal impulses. You reported also being involved in several motor vehicle accidents, including one in 2011, when you walked into the path of an oncoming car. In 2022 you were involved in a motorbike accident, suffering a 'shattered pelvis, hip and injured left foot.' Some two months prior to being remanded, you were driving a car and deliberately smashed into a pole causing you to suffer a broken jaw and other dental injuries.
10. You are currently treated in custody with monthly buprenorphine injections and antidepressant medications.
11. In respect of drug and alcohol history, you commenced using cannabis and alcohol when you were only 13 years of age. Over the last decade you have used Xanax, methylamphetamine and GHB consistently and excessively. As well as smoking ice you have injected it.
12. From March to June 2024, you were an inpatient at the Odyssey House residential rehabilitation program. You left after transgressing the programs rules concerning relationships. Your only other experience of residential rehabilitation was back in 2011 when you completed a YSAS residential withdrawal program.
13. Mr Mackinnon considers that your functional intelligence and general cognitive functioning falls within the normal adult range. He opines that you suffer symptoms that meet the clinical criteria for the following major psychological disorders - complex post-traumatic stress disorder ('PTSD') and substance abuse disorder. At the time of his assessment your complex PTSD was manifesting 'at a mild level, with significant levels of both anxiety and depression evident, but depression being the dominant presenting symptom.'
14. The genesis of your complex PTSD can be found in the domestic violence and other distressing events you were exposed to during your formative years and several motor vehicle accidents. Other distressing incidents, including imprisonment, the death of your uncle, and the kidnapping of your sister, have likely 'helped to sustain and further complicate' your condition (at [55]). Your symptoms include - flashbacks, intrusive thoughts, anxiety, depression, anger management problems, and chronic interpersonal difficulties (at [56]).
15. Though he didn't diagnose the condition, Mr Mackinnon also considered that you laboured with several symptoms associated with Borderline Personality Disorder including suicidal ideation and poor sense of self (at [61]).
16. In terms of your substance abuse disorder he assessed it as currently in partial remission (at [62]) and opines that you 'first began engaging in illicit psychoactive substance use during [your] early adolescence, primarily as a ready means of self-medicating [your] chronic distress, which was a response to the dysfunctional and traumatic environment [you were] raised in. Since then, it appears that additional trauma and life stressors added impetus to [your] substance dependency, which has contributed to be a ready means for [you] to self-medicate [your] chronic distress' (at [63]).
17. Mr Mackinnon considered that you were suffering from both conditions at the time of your offending. He opines that these conditions made 'significant contributions' to your offending 'by degrading' your ability to apply good judgment and sound reasoning, making you more impulsive and reckless and less able to apply consequential thinking 'and fuelling a self-absorbed and irresponsible perspective that tended to ignore the rights and welfare of other persons' (at [76]). At the time you were suffering with 'both self-destructive and (externally) destructive impulses, strongly elevating [your] propensity to engage in reckless and irresponsible acts' (at [77]). You also report at the time habitually abusing ice and GHB, usually in large quantities, as a mean of self-medication (at [78]).
18. Mr Mackinnon opined that any further term of imprisonment would place you at 'significant risk of suffering deteriorating mental health, with a return of suicidal ideation, and [you] will then require crisis mental health care' (at [85]).
19. While you appear to cope with prison, reporting that it has become 'easy' for you, your ability to cope with is constrictive nature appears to have now 'been compromised by a growing desire to overcome [your] self-defeating behaviour, establish a stable and legitimate lifestyle, and strive for a better life' (at [86]).
20. Your Counsel submits that Bugmy[9] principles have both specific and general application in your case. He submits 'there is a causal nexus between [your] early life experience and the offending before the Court.' At a young age, and through no fault of your own, you were exposed to a chaotic and abusive home environment and neglected. The early experiences of trauma have had life-long consequences for you. Your Counsel submits that in sentencing you there must be a general reduction in your moral culpability due to this.
21. In addition, it is submitted that all of the Verdins principles are 'powerfully engaged when considering the appropriate sentence.'[10] He submits both general and specific deterrence should be moderated due to your psychological profile. You are not an appropriate vehicle for general deterrence, despite the serious nature of the offending and specific deterrence is apparently not effective, given your longstanding institutionalisation. He further submits, a sentence of imprisonment that takes these principles into account 'will also best serve the community.'
22. The prosecution did not challenge the opinions of Mr Mackinnon or the broad submissions made by your Counsel. However, they emphasise that there is a correlated heightened need to protect the community.
23. In sentencing you, I take into account, as submitted by your Counsel, your disadvantaged, impoverished and traumatic upbringing and I accept that the Bugmy[11] principles have application.
24. In respect of Verdins[12], I take into account, and accept, the opinions and diagnoses of Mr Mackinnon. I also accept that the Verdins principles have some application in your case, as submitted by your Counsel. The foundation for your complex PTSD lies, as already canvassed, in your traumatic past. Your substance abuse disorder has its genesis in your early adolescence as a means of self-medicating chronic distress.
25. While it is unclear precisely how drug affected you were at the time of the offending you report habitually using ice and GHB (at [78]) and instruct that you were 'heavily influenced by drugs at the time' (paragraph [9] submissions). The fact of, and likely impact of your drug use at the time reduces the amount of moderation I will give considerations of moral culpability and deterrence. In particular, as stated during the plea hearing, general and specific deterrence are not eliminated and, while subject to some appropriate moderation, remain important considerations. Also, I accept that community protection is an important factor.
26. On the evidence, I also accept that your conditions mean that a term of imprisonment weighs more heavily on you then a person in 'normal health'. I don't accept that there is a serious risk of imprisonment having a 'significant adverse effect' on your mental health and I understood that your Counsel did not persist with limb 6 of Verdins[13].

1. Your Counsel also relies upon, and I take into account, the 'significant delay' in the resolution of your case. Referring to the case of Tones v The Queen[14] he relies on the two limbs to delay, that is both the unfairness limb and the rehabilitation limb. He submits that you have experienced significant anxiety as a result of the delay and the uncertainty of your sentence. He also submits that the delay has allowed you to display 'some 'green shoots' of rehabilitation, being the drug-free period at Odyssey House'.

1. Turning to your rehabilitative prospects, there is a need for caution given your extensive and relevant criminal history. I also take into account that you were on bail and it seems a community corrections order at the time of this offending. Further, I take into account that you reoffended after your release from Odyssey House. By the time of your arrest on the outstanding warrant you had managed to secure some stability and employment as a casual labourer.
2. Mr Mackinnon considers that you continue (at [87]) 'to pose a significant risk of engaging in serious offending, including violent offending.' However, he also assesses that your prospects would be enhanced by you maintaining your current buprenorphine and antidepressant medication regime and securing stable accommodation. 'Mr Sage's personal history suggests that rehabilitative progress will not come easily to him, and he will have to make concerted and sustained efforts in order to have reasonable prospects for making such progress. Should Mr Sage relapse into substance abuse, he will be at high risk of recidivism, which may include additional offences involving recklessness and violence'.
3. In the long term, Mr Mackinnon considers that you would benefit from engaging in ongoing psychological therapy to address your mental health conditions and associated issues. You would also benefit from exploration of your vocational and recreational options.
4. At the time of Mr Mackinnon's assessment you appeared to be genuinely motivated to make rehabilitative progress (at [66]).
5. In respect of your time at Odyssey House, I take into account that you were a resident there for the period between 19 March and 5 July 2024. I take this into account in the Akoka sense[15]. I also take into account the efforts and progress that you made towards your rehabilitation at the time. The letter of 10 July 2024 confirms your admission into the therapeutic community and that you remained drug free and engaged in treatment. You also abided by the program values of respect, concern and honesty. Further, you completed an eight-week program called Motivating Affect Self Control, designed to assist in daily living and management. You told your Counsel that you learnt a great deal about yourself during the three months you spent as a resident of Odyssey House.
6. Your Counsel submits that you are highly motivated to continue your journey of recovery, wishing to return to Odyssey House on your eventual release. You recognise that you are doomed to repeat the cycle of offending unless you can address your drug addiction.
7. Also, I take into account the considerable efforts that you have made in prison. You have worked a Peer Educator within your cultural community. The role includes listening to other Aboriginal prisoners and trying to support them; helping to orientate new prisoners, demonstrative positive role model behaviours within the prison and participating in training and regular supervision and debriefing sessions (see letter GEO group 12 March 2024). You have also completed a range of courses, including 'men leading by example' and the Alcohol and Me Program (see certificates).
8. You are also engaged in the ACSO ReStart program. ReStart is a voluntary referral-based service that provides participants with support in the community. It focuses on providing assertive outreach support to help participants to establish supports and community linkages over a three (3) month period. The program will assist you upon your release (see letter 20 May 2025).
9. Your Counsel submits that you are committed to your rehabilitation and that you wish to open an art gallery to assist other aboriginal men in custody.
10. Overall, I accept that with appropriate supports and structures in place, to best optimise your current motivation and commitment to remain drug free, your prospects of rehabilitation will be enhanced.

1. The purposes for which sentences may be imposed are just punishment, general deterrence, specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community.
2. I take into account the sentencing guidelines referred to in s5 of the Sentencing Act 1991, where relevant in your case. I have had regard to the maximum penalties. I also take into account the principles of proportionality, parsimony and, as already noted, totality. As already noted, your offending was committed while you were on bail but I consider that totality remains an important consideration.[16]
3. There was no dispute between Counsel that a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period is the only appropriate sentence, though your Counsel did also suggest that it was open to the Court to impose a straight term. Your Counsel submits that you have become institutionalised at an early age and that previous sentences have not prevented ongoing recidivist offending. He submits that any sentence imposed should not be a 'crushing one' given your complex profile, the recent progress you did make at Odyssey House and your current motivation to resume your rehabilitation in the community.
4. I consider that the only just and appropriate sentence in your case is a term of imprisonment. The term imposed must reflect the gravity of the offending, the relevant sentencing objectives and purposes, as already canvassed, along with the significant mitigatory factors advanced on your behalf.

1. Synthesising all relevant factors, you are convicted and sentenced as follows -
2. On Charge 1, theft of motor vehicle, five months' imprisonment.
3. Charge 2, aggravated offence of recklessly exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving, two years and six months' imprisonment.
4. Charge 3, retention of stolen goods, seven months' imprisonment.
5. Summary offence Charge 7, three months' imprisonment.
6. Summary offence Charge 9, two months' imprisonment.
7. Charge 2 is the base sentence. Orders for cumulation are as follows. Charge 1, one month. Charge 3, two months. Summary offence Charge 7, which is the unlicenced drive, one month. That ought to arrive at a total effective sentence of two years and 10 months' imprisonment
8. This amounts to a total effective sentence of 2 years, 10 months and I set a non-parole period of 1 year 11 months.
9. Pursuant to s.18 I declare that you have served 751 days in custody Pursuant to s6AAA, I indicate that had you not entered a plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to four years and two months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years. On charge 2, the Sentencing Act requires the mandatory loss of licence for at least 18 months as s.317AF of the Crimes Act 1958 arising out of the driving of a motor vehicle is a 'serious motor vehicle offence.' On charge 2 I cancel all licences and disqualify you from driving for 18 months (keeping it to a minimum, taking into account in particular the delay in this matter). On charge 1, theft of motor vehicle, I disqualify you from driving for a period of 6 months.
10. I make the disposal and forfeiture orders in the terms sought, unopposed.

[4] [2020] VSCA 219.

[5] [2020] VSCA 219.

[6] Nelson v the Queen [2020] VSCA 219.

[7] Bobby McKay v The King [No 2] [2023] VSCA 8.

[8] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.

[9] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.

[10] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102.

[11] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.

[12] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102.

[13] R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102.

[14] [2017] VSCA 118.

[15] Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214.

[16] Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s16(3C).