DPP v Tao

1. The circumstances of your offending were set out in the Amended Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 19 November 2024, Exhibit 1 at your Determination Hearing.
2. Your offending can now be briefly summarised.
3. Your offending took place on 24 August 2023. Six days earlier, on 18 August 2023, a Family Violence Safety Notice was issued, listing you as the respondent, and your former partner, Alexis Farmer,[2] as the protected person. Pursuant to that safety notice, you were prohibited from, amongst other things, being anywhere within five metres of Ms Farmer, as well as being at or within 200 metres of an address in Canterbury Road, Vermont. The safety notice was served on you on 18 August 2023.
4. On 21 August 2023 you attended at this address and asked where Ms Farmer was. Another person residing at the property, Mr Angus Latkin,[3] was home at the time, and showed you around the address to prove that Ms Farmer was not there. He then drove you home. Your conduct in this regard forms the basis of related Summary Charge 8, contravening a Family Violence Safety Notice, as pursuant to that notice you were prohibited from attending at this address.
5. Three days later, at about 1.30 am on 24 August 2023, you again attended at the Canterbury Road address in breach of the Family Violence Safety Notice; your conduct in this regard forming the basis of related Summary Charge 7, contravening a Family Violence Safety Notice. You started banging on the front door of the property, which was answered by another resident, who observed that you appeared to be drug-affected.
6. You entered the premises and demanded to know the whereabouts of Ms Farmer, saying, 'Where is she? I need her ... Call her! Call her now!'
7. Mr Latkin, who had shown you around the property three days earlier, was awoken by the sound of you shouting and got out of bed to investigate. You then began yelling at Mr Latkin before demanding the keys to his vehicle, a 2009 Ford Utility. You were holding a blue Stanley knife in your right hand. You said to Mr Latkin, 'Give me your keys or I'll cut your throat!' You held the knife up to Mr Latkin, waving it around in front of him, and threatened to stab him if he did not hand over the keys. Fearful of being stabbed, Mr Latkin complied with your demands and handed you the keys, which you then used to steal his Ford Utility which was parked in the driveway. Your conduct in this regard forms the basis of Charge 1 on the indictment, armed robbery. Your possession of the Stanley knife, which was later located by police, forms the basis of related Summary Charge 4, possession of a controlled weapon.
8. As a result of your actions, Mr Latkin contacted the police. Soon after, Mr Latkin's vehicle, which was being driven by you, was observed by police travelling at a fast rate of speed on Canterbury Road. Soon after you abandoned the vehicle, and you were observed by police who had been monitoring you, fleeing on foot. As you were fleeing you discarded a black backpack. You were then arrested by police. Inside the backpack was a small clear plastic bottle containing 1,4-butanediol, this forming the basis of Charge 2 on the indictment, possession of a drug of dependence. A search of the vehicle by police revealed the blue Stanley knife that you had used in the commission of the armed robbery.
9. You were taken by police to the Box Hill police station where you were interviewed and made 'no comment' in relation to the allegations.
10. At the time of your driving conduct, you were subject to a disqualification order from the Frankston Magistrates Court on 1 February 2023 in relation to offences of dangerous driving whilst pursued by police and driving in a manner dangerous. Accordingly, your driving conduct forms the basis of related Summary Charge 5, driving whilst disqualified.
11. On 29 March 2023 at the Ringwood Magistrates Court, you were granted bail in relation to charges which included handle stolen goods, unlicensed driving, and dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime. As you were then subject to bail at the time of the armed robbery your conduct forms the basis of related Summary Charge 6, committing an indictable offence whilst on bail.
12. You were remanded into custody on the date of your arrest, and you have remained in custody since, a period of 628 days.
13. Whilst no victim impact statement was provided in this matter, it can be reasonably assumed that the victim of the armed robbery, Mr Latkin, found the armed robbery to be a frightening experience.

Nature and gravity of the offending and your role in it

1. The relevant statutory maximum penalties for the offences to which you have pleaded guilty reflect, in a general sense, the seriousness of your conduct, particularly in relation to the offence of armed robbery, which carries a maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment. This is a crime which has a degree of prevalence in the community, enhancing the need for any penalty I impose to reflect the sentencing purposes of denunciation, general deterrence and community protection.
2. Your offending occurred at a residential property in the middle of the night, a place where Mr Latkin was very much entitled to feel safe. This was not random offending on your part, you had attended at the same property just three days earlier where you had dealt with Mr Latkin who showed you around the property to assure you that Ms Farmer was not then present. Your return to the property when the armed robbery was committed shows your determination and likely increased the level of apprehension and fear on the part of Mr Latkin. Your offending carries with it a family violence context by virtue of the fact that you were prohibited from being at the property as a result of the Family Violence Safety Notice, which had been issued on 18 August 2023. You were clearly searching for Ms Farmer in contravention of a Family Violence Safety Notice.
3. The offensive weapon utilised by you in the commission of the armed robbery was a Stanley knife, a bladed weapon with the capacity to cause considerable harm and injury. Your conduct in the armed robbery was not passive. In addition to making demands for the whereabouts of Ms Farmer, you threatened to cut the throat of Mr Latkin. You held the knife up and waved it around in front of him and threatened to stab him if he did not hand over the keys. In all the circumstances, this must be seen, in my view, as a concerning example of the crime of armed robbery. Your culpability for this serious conduct, which I view as significant, is increased by virtue of the fact that your presence at the property constituted a breach of a Family Violence Safety Notice and your offending occurred whilst you were subject to a grant of bail.

1. I turn now to your background and personal circumstances.
2. You are currently 33 years old. [4] You were born in Hobart, Tasmania. At the age of three you relocated to Victoria, and you have reported essentially being raised by your mother after your parents separated when you were just a toddler. Between the ages of four and 16 you essentially had no contact with your father.
3. In January 2008, your mother sadly passed away after a protracted illness.[5] You were just 16 years old. Following your mother's death, which deeply affected you, you resided with your maternal grandparents for a year before residing with your father from the ages of 17 to 20. Your father was apparently a drug addict and an alcoholic who had a history of incarcerations. You had previously had very limited contact with him. It seems that your time with your father was an unhappy one, as you witnessed episodes of verbal and physical violence between your father and stepmother and ultimately you have reported that you left your father's care at the age of 20 because you 'hated' him. You have apparently had no contact with your father since then and you are unaware of his whereabouts.
4. You maintain ongoing contact with your grandparents, who are now quite elderly. You also have reported a close relationship with your younger sister, who is currently undertaking a Magistrates Court Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order. Your sister has been present remotely during your proceedings.
5. You have a relatively limited education to the Year 10 level, which was impacted by the death of your mother.[6] You have a very limited employment history. You have reported previous roles as a labourer, but you have estimated that you have only worked for a total of one year in your lifetime. You have reported that your unemployment has been largely due to your poor mental health and past incarcerations.
6. You have a problematic substance-use history, with a pattern of binge drinking alcohol from the age of 16, regular cannabis consumption from the age of 16 following the death of your mother, and a problematic history of amphetamine and methamphetamine use from a similar age, with you commencing smoking ice daily from 2022.[7] You have reported daily use of GHB since 2023 and you have also reported a history of abusing benzodiazepines.
7. In the comprehensive clinical advisor assessment of Mr Harry Howe, with his findings set out in his report dated 4 November 2024,[8] you provided a detailed account of your substance-use pattern in the community in the period leading up to your offending. Clearly you were ingesting ice and GHB virtually daily with regular Valium as well.
8. You have a troubling criminal record dating back to the age of 18 in 2010. In that year you were sentenced to a two-year community-based order, which you completed in relation to three charges of attempted robbery. That order included a requirement to complete 250 hours of unpaid community work, together with various therapeutic conditions, and it is to your credit that you completed this significant penalty.
9. In 2013 you were sentenced to a total effective sentence of six years and nine months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years and nine months for intentionally causing serious injury and armed robbery. The intentionally cause serious injury involved a stabbing which occurred in the course of an armed robbery which was committed by you in company with another. In relation to the armed robbery, you were sentenced to two years and six months' imprisonment.
10. Subsequent to that significant sentence, for which I understand you were granted parole for a period, you have three subsequent court appearances in 2020, 2021, and 2023. Each of those court appearances resulted in relatively short sentences of imprisonment with the 2021 sentence also incorporating a community correction order which was subsequently breached.
11. It is clear from your criminal history, and indeed you have reported to others, that you have spent some eight years in custody as an adult. You appear to have been released from your last sentence in the early months of 2023, lasting only a period of months before the current offending which occurred in August 2023. You are, it seems, at significant risk of institutionalisation, notwithstanding your relatively young age. Clearly, previous sentences, which have included both therapeutic and custodial dispositions, have not succeeded in breaking your pattern of criminality.
12. You have a documented history of mental-health issues. You have reported that one of the motivations for using illicit substances has been to attempt to manage your poor mental health. You have reported a history of anxiety from the age of 17, for which you have variously been treated with Valium, Xanax, and temazepam.[9] You have reported a history of experiencing auditory hallucinations which you only experience in the context of intoxication with illicit drugs. You have also reported previous instances of suicidality, both in 2020 and 2023. Indeed, you have reported to psychologist Sandra Cokorilo that your possession of the bladed item on the date of the armed robbery was related to suicidality.
13. Documents tendered at your plea hearing, Exhibits F and H respectively, document aspects of your mental health history. A mental-health summary from Forensicare dated 30 October 2024 documents previous contacts with

mental-health services in 2020 and 2021, namely the Box Hill Hospital Area Mental Health Service, St Vincent's Hospital, The Alfred Psychiatry Services and the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health. You have required three inpatient admissions between March 2020 and July 2020. In 2020 you were noted to have been suffering with a mental and behavioural disorder due to methylamphetamine use. 14. The last documented contact with public mental health services in Victoria, according to that document,[10] was with Box Hill Hospital triage on 17 August 2023. A discharge summary from the Box Hill Hospital relevant to that date does confirm your attendance for 22 hours in the emergency department in the context of deteriorating mental health over the past few months with hallucinations, and in the context of suicidal ideation, with a history of psychosis. The discharge summary noted 'psychosis resolving as amphetamines in his system have washed away'. The discharge summary appears to refer to your report of a history of schizophrenia, consistent with your self-report to Ms Cokorilo. Notwithstanding that, there does not appear to be a documented diagnosis of this nature. 15. In the months leading up to your offending in 2023, I understand that you had been largely residing with your supportive sister, however, in the context of your degrading mental health you moved out and resided at one or more boarding houses. You have reported using illicit substances in this period in the context of attempting to deal with your degrading mental health. Indeed, you reported to Ms Cokorilo that your mental health was 'really poor' in the days leading up to the armed robbery,[11] and that a week prior to the offending you had presented at an emergency department with your sister seeking help for auditory hallucinations, with you being given sedatives and olanzapine before being discharged. You reported to Ms Cokorilo that at the time of the offending you were abusing GHB and methamphetamine and that on the day of the offending you were 'not feeling well' and were 'confused' and unable to understand what was happening.[12] You were upset that your partner had left you and could not understand why there was a Family Violence Safety Notice. 16. Throughout the numerous hearings before me, I have expressed considerable concern with regard to your apparent minimisation of your offending, verging on a denial of the offending, which would make your pleas of guilty problematic. In particular, the sentiments expressed by you to the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Court case manager for the purposes of the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Court assessment report were highly problematic. However, I accept that at the time of your offending you were likely experiencing problematic mental health in the context of your illicit substance use issues and that you were seeking help as verified by your attendance at the Box Hill Hospital one week prior to your offending, reporting the experience of hallucinations. I will shortly deal with your moral culpability for the offending; however, it does appear to me that as a result of your degrading mental health in the context of illicit substance use your recall of the offending is extremely unreliable. 17. According to Ms Cokorilo your 'current offending is attributed primarily to poor mental health in the context of what appears to be drug-induced psychosis, rather than violent ideation or psychopathy.'[13] Moreover, in evidence before me on 26 March 2025, you accepted that you had threatened your victim at the time of the armed robbery. You also accepted that given the state that you were in you might not have the best recollection of what happened that night and that your victim may have a better memory than you. 18. I will turn shortly to the impacts of your drug use and psychological functioning on the sentencing exercise. However, after careful consideration it seems relatively clear to me that at the time of the offending you were likely experiencing perceptual disturbances as a result of your drug-induced mental health difficulties. 19. As I have stated, you have been in custody since your arrest on 24 August 2023, a period of 628 days. You have maintained contact with your sister and your grandparents as best you can. For a number of months now you have been in receipt of opioid-replacement therapy. You have also been in receipt of the anti-psychotic medication, olanzapine. You have undertaken and completed a number of programs in custody, as verified by the bundle of documents tendered at your Determination Hearing.[14] 20. As indicated when you gave evidence before me on 26 March 2025, you have kept yourself busy whilst in custody through various working activities, and you are currently working as a yard billet, a voluntary position. In evidence you referred to working seven days a week in the area of horticulture and that you had previously worked in the laundry. You also referred to spending time at the gym.

Matters relevant to the making of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Court order

1. I turn now to matters relevant to the making of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order. The purposes of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order are to facilitate your rehabilitation, to take account of your drug or alcohol dependency, to reduce the level of criminal activity associated with drug or alcohol dependency and to reduce your health risks associated with drug or alcohol dependency.[15] Importantly, if I am considering making a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, I must regard your rehabilitation and the protection of the community from you, achieved through your rehabilitation, as having greater importance than the other purposes set out in s5(1) of the Sentencing Act.[16] This is an important consideration. Having regard to this particular provision of the Sentencing Act, I am required to give primacy to your rehabilitation and community protection through the lens of your rehabilitation over other sentencing purposes that would otherwise have significant application in your particular case, namely, specific and general deterrence and denunciation.
2. The criteria for the making of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order are set out in s18Z of the Sentencing Act. Of relevance to this case, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that you are dependent on drugs or alcohol,[17] noting that according to Senior Clinical Advisor Harry Howe in his assessment report dated 4 November 2024, you would have satisfied the diagnostic criteria for a stimulant use disorder at the time of the initial offending which was severe in nature.[18] Whilst according to Mr Howe you have been in sustained remission whilst in the custodial setting, you would be at significant risk of lapse or relapse upon release from custody.[19] I note the drug dependency criteria was conceded by the prosecution in this case.[20]
3. I turn now to the contribution criteria pursuant to s18Z(1)(c)(ii) of the Sentencing Act. Pursuant to that provision, I may only make a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order in your case if satisfied on the balance of probabilities that your dependency contributed to the commission of the offending. The degree of contribution is not stipulated in the relevant legislative provision. Accordingly, in my view I must take a commonsense approach to this criteria to determine whether on balance I am satisfied that your substance use dependency played a role in the commission of your offending. Whilst initially taking issue with the contribution criteria, at your Determination Hearing on 21 November 2024, Mr Tamburro on behalf of the prosecution essentially conceded that your offending was a consequence of your substance dependency.[21] That concession was based upon the provision of the defence materials, in particular the psychological report of Sandra Cokorilo. In that regard, I note that Ms Cokorilo attributes your offending to poor mental health in the context of what appears to be a drug-induced psychosis.[22] In all the circumstances, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that your substance dependency contributed to the commission of the offending such that the contribution criteria is met.
4. In order to impose a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order in your case, I must be satisfied that it would otherwise be appropriate to impose a sentence of imprisonment of no more than four years. In this case, other than drawing to my attention matters said to be relevant to the sentencing exercise, the prosecution declined to make any submissions as to whether a sentence not exceeding four years' imprisonment would be manifestly inadequate. In my view, an assessment as to the four-year criteria requires the application of orthodox sentencing principles having regard to the re-ordered sentencing purposes contained in s18X(2) of the Sentencing Act.
5. I have already referred to the nature and gravity of your offending. Your conduct was both serious and concerning. Notwithstanding the primacy attached to the sentencing purpose of rehabilitation, the sentencing purposes of denunciation and general deterrence remain relevant to the sentencing exercise. Other members of the community must know that engaging in this type of behaviour is completely unacceptable. Likewise, your extensive and concerning criminal history means that the sentencing purpose of specific deterrence also remains relevant. Put simply; in sentencing you I must seek to deter you from again engaging in such serious criminality. I turn now to a consideration of your level of culpability for your offending. Your criminal history elevates your level of moral culpability for the current offending as you must have known of the likely significant legal consequences for your actions and the fact that you then re-offended is self-evidently concerning. As I have indicated already, you were prohibited from attending at the premises by virtue of a Family Violence Safety Notice and your non-compliance with this notice also elevates your offending. You were also subject to a grant of bail which involved an undertaking by you not to re-offend. The fact that you offended in those circumstances also increases your level of culpability. However, having regard to your history of disruption and disadvantage, I am satisfied that your moral culpability for the offending is reduced to some degree in accordance with a general application of the Bugmy principles. According to Ms Cokorilo you have endured 'an adverse early environment characterised by paternal absence, early maternal death, and paternal maltreatment, drug use, alcoholism and incarcerations'.[23] Ms Cokorilo referred to the onset of your substance abuse and pathological anxiety as being directly related to your mother's death when you were 16. According to Ms Cokorilo you were then placed in the care of your father with whom you had very limited contact previously and you were subjected to maltreatment and exposed to alcoholism, drug abuse and criminality. According to Ms Cokorilo this negative modelling and lack of secure paternal attachment are inferred to have made a further contribution to your own negative trajectory and influence your acceptance, needs and peer choices.[24] I accept that your experiences as a young person likely impacted your moral development such that a mitigatory allowance is warranted with regards to an assessment of your moral culpability for your offending. Having regard to the interconnection between your voluntary drug use and your degrading mental health in the lead up to your offending, your counsel did not submit that your moral culpability was reduced due to any mental impairment in accordance with Verdins Principle 1.[25] However, whilst a formal allowance is not warranted in your case, I have had regard in a general sense to your likely level of functioning at the time of your offending. I am satisfied that in the lead up to your offending and indeed at the time of your offending, you were likely enduring perceptual disturbance as a result of degrading mental health, for which you had sought assistance. Putting it another way; I am satisfied that you did not engage in ordered, planned or sophisticated offending. Whilst your likely presentation at the time of the offending raises issues with regard to risk to yourself and others and the need for community protection, an assessment overall as to the circumstances of your offending and your level of responsibility for it, cannot in my view ignore your likely psychological state at the time.
6. You indicated a plea of guilty to these matters at a hearing on 20 June 2024, prior to any cross-examination of witnesses, and I note that no committal proceeding occurred in this matter. As conceded by the prosecution, this constitutes a relatively early plea of guilty, warranting a mitigatory allowance on sentencing. However, contrary to your counsel's submissions, I am not satisfied that a further mitigatory allowance is warranted on the issue of remorse. Put simply; for whatever reason, you have significant insight issues with regard to the level and nature of your wrongdoing such that an allowance on the basis of remorse is not appropriate in your case.
7. You have now been in custody since August 2023, and I accept that for a protracted period now you have had this matter hanging over your head, which has no doubt caused you a level of anxiety. For the reasons that I have previously explained, I am satisfied that you have used your time in custody productively. Having regard to all of the materials provided on your behalf and having regard to your evidence before me on 26 March 2025 at your further Determination Hearing, I am satisfied that you are indeed motivated with regards to a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order and that you understand why you need considerable assistance to alter your life trajectory, which has been so problematic to date. Whilst given your extensive criminal history and the other matters relevant to your case, your prospects of rehabilitation must be seen as challenging. You are not without supports, namely, your elderly grandparents and your sister, Steph,[26] with whom you are close and who is currently embarking on her own drug treatment order in the Magistrates Court jurisdiction and who I note is present in court today. Your prospects of rehabilitation are clearly linked to your ability and willingness to wholeheartedly embrace specialist drug and alcohol interventions. In that sense your prospects are rather speculative, but to be clear, you are not in my view without rehabilitative hope. Indeed, Ms Cokorilo described your prospects of rehabilitation as being reasonable.[27]
8. In conducting my own assessment with regards to the four-year criteria, I have of course had regard to the issue of current sentencing practices, and I have considered both cases referred to by the prosecution and the previous decisions referred to by your counsel. Ultimately, current sentencing practices are but one of the many sentencing factors relevant to the sentencing exercise.
9. In all the circumstances and having regard in particular to s18X(2) of the Sentencing Act, I am satisfied that it would otherwise be appropriate to impose a sentence of imprisonment of no more than four years in your case.
10. Returning to the criteria for the making of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, I must not make a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order unless satisfied in all the circumstances that it is appropriate to do so.[28] The prosecution in this case essentially submitted that due to various matters you are not a suitable candidate for a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order and it would not be appropriate to impose one in your case. Significant reliance was placed upon the case manager assessment report from Mr Harrison Suidgeest dated 25 October 2024, Exhibit 3 at your Determination Hearing. Mr Suidgeest found you unsuitable for a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order having regard to your limited support network in the community, your lack of accountability as evidenced by your considerable minimisation with regards to your offending, your high risk of offending and relapse, and considerable concerns with regard to your risk of family violence. I have already referred to your concerning articulations with regard to the offending, which can reasonably be seen as minimising, if not denying responsibility, and the context of your degrading mental health at the time of the offending. Whilst the raising of concerns with regard to your risk of family violence in the case manager assessment report is appropriate, the court's concerns in that regard are considerably assuaged by the subsequent report from family violence social support worker Erica Beard in her report dated 12 March 2025.[29] According to Ms Beard your family violence risk in accordance with the relevant MARAM framework is elevated. However, according to Ms Beard, whilst not recognising some of the most serious elements of your behaviour, you showed some awareness and knowledge about unhealthy ways you had conducted yourself throughout the most recent relationship and practical things you needed to change. You demonstrated a commitment to engage in any program that would serve to further increase your self-awareness and develop an understanding of triggers that have led to previous episodes of violence. According to Ms Beard the intensive nature of a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order would allow you to receive practical support around housing, finances and possibly employment, all of which serve as protective factors and mitigate the family violence risk presented to victim survivors. Ms Beard concludes that if you were to be placed on a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, rigorous monitoring and safety planning would be needed to continually assess and manage your family violence risk. Finally, whilst the case manager refers to your limited social support network, having considered all of the materials and observed you in evidence, and having regard to the presence by video of your sister at multiple hearings before me, I am satisfied that you do have supports in the community which will assist in your progress on a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order.
11. Ultimately, I have concluded that it would be appropriate to place you on a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order with carefully constructed conditions.
12. Mr Tao, would you please stand.

1. In relation to all charges, you are convicted and placed upon a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order. This order commences today.
2. A Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order has two parts: the treatment and supervision part and the custodial part. The treatment and supervision part itself has two parts which are as follows.
3. The core conditions which are that:

(a) you must not commit, whether in or outside of Victoria, another offence punishable on conviction by imprisonment during the time the order is in force;

(b) you must attend Drug Court when required by the court to do so;

(c) you must report to the Melbourne Drug Court House within two clear working days after the order is imposed;

(d) you must report to and accept visits from members of the Drug Court;

(e) you must undergo treatment for alcohol and drug dependency as specified in the order or by the court;

(f) you must give notice of any change of address, at least two clear working days before the change, to a specified Drug Court officer;

(g) you are not to leave Victoria without the permission of the Drug Court; and

(h) you are to obey all lawful directions and instructions from the Drug Court team.

The core conditions will operate for 42 months or until further order.

(a) you comply with the individual treatment plan dated 12 May 2025 and to be signed by you this day;

(b) you must submit to drug and alcohol testing as directed;

(c) you must submit to detoxification or other treatments specified in the order as directed;

(d) you must attend vocational, educational and employment programs as directed;

(e) you must submit to medical, psychiatric and psychological treatment as directed;

(f) you must reside as directed by the Drug and Alcohol and Treatment Court;

(g) you must comply with a curfew that you remain at your address between the hours of 9.00 pm and 6.00 am;

(h) you are not to use a drug of dependence without lawful authorisation;

(i) you are to abstain from alcohol;

(j) you must not drive a motor vehicle;

(k) you must engage with the family violence social support worker as directed to understand the impact of violence on partners and children, take responsibility for behaviour and develop safe and appropriate communication skills; and

(l) you are to do, or not do, anything else that the Drug Court considers:

• necessary or appropriate concerning your drug and alcohol dependency; and
• the personal factors that the Drug Court considers contributed to your criminal behaviour.

1. These program conditions will operate for two years or until further order.
2. The custodial part of the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order is the term of imprisonment that I would have imposed had I not placed you on a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order, and it is a term of imprisonment of three years and six months. That is made up as follows:

(a) on Charge 1 on the Indictment, armed robbery, three years and six months' imprisonment;

(b) on Charge 2 on the Indictment, possession of 1,4-butanediol, seven days' imprisonment;

(c) on the related summary charge of possession of a controlled weapon, two months' imprisonment;

(d) on the related summary offence of driving whilst disqualified, two months' imprisonment;

(e) on the related summary offence of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, one-month imprisonment;

(f) on the two charges of contravene family violence notice, an aggregate term of four months' imprisonment.

1. The terms of imprisonment with regards to Charge 2 on the indictment and the related summary offences are concurrent with the term of imprisonment with regards to the armed robbery offence, making a total term of three years and six months' imprisonment.
2. Again, to clarify, that is not a term that you need to serve right now, it is essentially suspended in order for you to undertake the other portions of the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order.
3. I declare that you have served 628 days of pre-sentence detention.
4. In relation to the charges of theft of motor vehicle and drive whilst disqualified, I order that any licence held by you is cancelled and you are disqualified from obtaining a licence for a period of 18 months from today.
5. I make a disposal order in relation to the Stanley knife and the small plastic bottle containing the drug of dependence.
6. Pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act, had you pleaded not guilty but been found guilty at trial, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of four years and six months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years and three months' imprisonment.
7. Mr Tao, you can take a seat for a moment.
8. Mr Tamburro, any issues or ambiguities with regards to the sentence.
9. MR TAMBURRO: No, Your Honour.
10. HIS HONOUR: The same question Mr Mitchell.
11. MR MITCHELL: No, Your Honour.
12. HIS HONOUR: All right. Mr Mitchell, I'm going to ask you now to go to the back of the court and have a couple of documents signed; an individual treatment plan which I understand you've already gone through with your client and the drug and alcohol treatment order itself which contains all of the things that I have read out. Obviously, there's a lot in this order and given your client's history and background it is important that he understands the document that he is signing. So, I'll give you a few moments to do that. Any issues you can come back to me. Thanks.
13. MR MITCHELL: Yes, Your Honour.

[15] Section 18X(i1) of the Sentencing Act 1991

[16] S18X(2) of the Sentencing Act 1991

[20] Paragraph [22] of Prosecution Submissions on Determination and Sentence dated 19 November 2024, Exhibit 2.

[25] The Queen v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269

[28] Section 18Z(3)(a)