R v BB [2013] ACTSC 290

5. For the aggravated burglary at Page on 1 September 2009, BB be sentenced to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2013.

6. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to four months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Page.

7. For the aggravated burglary at Braddon on 2 September 2009, BB be sentenced to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 16 March 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to three months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Page.

8. For the theft of property from the aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 March 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the burglary at Braddon.

9. For the aggravated burglary at Kaleen on 20 February 2010, BB be sentenced to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Braddon.

10. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to four months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Kaleen.

11. For the burglary at Cook on 20 December 2010, BB be sentenced to seven months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Kaleen.

12. For the theft of property from that burglary, BB be sentenced to three months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the burglary at Cook.

13. For the aggravated burglary at Reid on 10 April 2011, BB be sentenced to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to four months on the sentence for the burglary at Cook.

14. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to seven months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that aggravated burglary.

15. For the burglary also at Reid on 10 April 2011, BB be sentenced to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 January 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Reid.

16. For the theft from that burglary, BB be sentenced to three months' imprisonment to commence on 10 January 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the burglary.

17. For the burglary at Downer on 18 April 2011, BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 April 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the burglary at Reid.

18. For the theft of property from that burglary, BB be sentenced to three months' imprisonment to commence on 10 April, 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that burglary.

19. That is a sentence of twenty months from 10 February 2013, to take into account pre-sentence custody and to end on 9 October 2014 to be served by full-time custody.

20. For the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 22 April 2011, BB be sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 10 December, 2013 to take into account pre-sentence custody and totality.

21. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 December 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that aggravated burglary.

22. For the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 25 April 2011, BB be sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 22 April 2011.

23. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the aggravated burglary.

24. For the aggravated burglary in Kambah on 17 November 2011, BB be sentenced to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 25 April 2011.

25. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that aggravated burglary.

26. For the burglary at Greenway on 17 November 2011, BB be sentenced to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Kambah.

27. For the theft of property from that burglary, BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that burglary.

28. For taking and using a motor vehicle without authority on 21 November 2011, BB be sentenced to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the burglary at Greenway.

29. For the burglary at Hawker on 24 November 2011, BB be sentenced to eleven months' imprisonment to commence on 10 November 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to three months on the sentence for the taking and using the motor vehicle without consent.

30. For the theft of property from that burglary, BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 November 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that burglary.

31. For the offence of damaging property, BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June, 2015, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the burglary at Hawker.

32. BB be convicted of dishonestly without consent riding in a motor vehicle between 29 September and 9 October 2012.

33. BB be sentenced to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2015, that is, to be cumulative as to four months on the sentence for the offence of damaging property.

34. BB be convicted of the burglary at O'Connor on 30 November 2012.

35. BB be sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2015, that is, to be cumulative as to five months on the sentence for the dishonestly riding in a motor vehicle without consent.

36. BB be convicted of damaging property on 30 November 2013.

37. BB be sentenced to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 May 2016, that is, to be cumulative as to two months with the sentence for the burglary.

38. That is a total sentence of twenty-five months.

39. That sentence be suspended on 10 October 2014.

40. BB be required to sign an undertaking to comply with the offender's good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of two years from 10 October 2014 with the following conditions:

(a) a probation condition that BB be subject to the supervision of the Director-General, or her delegate, for a period of two years or such lesser period as the person delegated to supervise BB should consider appropriate and that BB comply with all reasonable directions given by the person delegated to supervise BB, including directions as to residence, treatment and counselling for alcohol and other drugs, and education; and

(b) a community service condition that BB complete 160 hours of community service work within twelve months from 10 October 2014.

1. This is a sad matter because much effort has been put by various agencies into ensuring a satisfactory outcome and it is likely that such will not be achieved. It is very difficult to know how best to approach a difficult sentencing task and to arrive at an outcome that is best for the community as a whole including the various agencies and the offender, BB.

2. BB is now seventeen years old. His criminal record shows that he has been known to the courts since 2009, that is, since he was thirteen. In that time, he has managed to accumulate forty-four offences on his criminal record, including six offences of burglary and six offences of aggravated burglary. This is many more than many adult offenders, who appear in this court on serious charges, have on their criminal record.

3. It seemed that BB was growing out of his offending behaviour and, with the help of the Turnaround Program, was making some progress. That, however, has been significantly interrupted in circumstances where the law of sentencing leaves little room for creative or constructive sentencing responses which may encourage rehabilitation before BB becomes part of what is often depressingly called "the revolving door syndrome".

4. The sentencing exercise with which I am engaged really started when BB was sentenced by me on 14 February 2012 for what I described as a "spree of criminality" comprising six offences of aggravated burglary, six offences of burglary, twelve offences of theft (each associated with one of the offences of aggravated burglary or burglary), an offence of causing damage to property and one offence of dishonestly taking a motor vehicle.

5. The facts of the offences were set out in my remarks on sentence, R v BM (Unreported, Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Refshauge J, 14 February 2012) as follows:

The crimes were committed between 1 September 2009 and 24 November 2011. They were committed in bursts; two on 1 and 2 September 2009, one on 20 February 2010, one on 20 December 2010, five between 10 and 25 April 2011 and four between 17 and 24 November 2011.

There were, as is clear, 12 burglaries, six of which were aggravated by being committed in company (that is, with another person) and one incident where, although BM could not legally drive, he stole a motor vehicle.

The burglaries were committed by BM, and in six cases one or two others, entering homes in 10 cases and clubs in two cases and stealing goods from them. The goods stolen were valued in total at more than $33 600. On each occasion the value of the goods stolen ranged from $21 up to $6 528. There were, therefore, some quite significant thefts.

In two cases the homes were ransacked with property strewn over the floor. This clearly disturbs and upsets the owners and makes the burglary more serious. In one case, damage was done by just pure vandalism to the walls of a club.

The goods stolen included what we now know to be the usual things stolen in burglaries; television sets, computer equipment (especially games), alcohol and cash. Also stolen, however, was jewellery, which may have a very great sentimental value and be irreplaceable. The computers may have had information or photographs which cannot be replaced, the loss of which will be very strongly felt by the owners.

Also stolen in some cases were items like car keys which not only cause the owner to worry about their cars later being stolen but also cause more disruption and inconvenience than the actual value of the item stolen.

...

In one incident BM entered an underground car park, as I mentioned above, and stole a car.

6. I set out in those remarks also the maximum penalties for the various offences. I do not need to repeat them.

7. For those offences, I sentenced BB to a total of two years and ten months' imprisonment to commence on 20 November 2011, to take into account the period of pre-sentence custody he had by then served. Judged by adult standards, this was a lenient sentence but, then, BB is not an adult and Pt 8A of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) provides a special regime for sentencing offenders under the age of eighteen years, supported by applicable principles of the common law.

8. I suspended the sentence on that day and made a good behaviour order for three years, with a probation condition and a condition that he participate in a residential rehabilitation program.

9. He breached that order by being expelled from the program but, by his own efforts, he was ultimately re-admitted and, with the support of the Crown, I effectively imposed the same sentence, though extending the period of the good behaviour order to 29 May 2015.

10. BB completed the program but it does not appear to have given him the skills to manage his addiction and to refrain from the use of alcohol and illicit drugs, for he continued to use both cannabis and alcohol. That continued use breached directions he had been given under the probation condition of the good behaviour order. There were other breaches charged, and BB admitted the breaches.

11. As a result, he was remanded in custody for three days and I then cancelled the good behaviour order and re-sentenced him effectively to the same sentence, namely imprisonment for two years and ten months, backdated to take into account pre-sentence custody, and suspended it that day with a good behaviour order to commence on 29 October 2012 and end on 28 April 2015, but with a community service work condition that he perform 100 hours of community work in twelve months.

12. On 22 March 2013, BB appeared before me having been committed for sentence on charges of burglary, damaging property and deliberately riding in a motor vehicle without the owner's consent. The facts for those offences were that:

On 29 September 2012 ... BB rode in a stolen motor vehicle. On 20 November 2012, he entered a home in O'Connor, stole some coins and a vase to a total value of $175 and, during the burglary forced some French windows open, causing damage to the doors and the door frame. He was arrested on 8 December 2012. ... He was also charged in the Childrens Court with minor theft of the vase and coins.

13. The details of those offences are set out in my sentencing remarks when I dealt with him on 30 May 2013: R v BB (Unreported, Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Refshauge J, 30 May 2013).

14. BB has also asked me to take into account an offence of minor theft which was set out on a List of Additional Offences. I do so, in accordance with the principles set out by the Court of Appeal in R v Campbell [2010] ACTCA 20 at [46]- [50].

15. I then re-imposed the same sentence as imposed for the earlier matters but made a further period of the good behaviour order from 30 May 2013 to 29 May 2016 and made an increased community service condition for BB to undertake 160 hours of unpaid community service work within twelve months.

16. On the fresh offences, I made a deferred sentence order that required BB to pay reparation of $5 per week. I indicated that he would be sentenced to a period of nine months' imprisonment, but that, if he complied with the order and the bail conditions, I would suspend the sentence.

18. BB left Canberra, contrary to directions he had been given to remain here. He went to Cowra and, while there, became involved in an incident which lead to him being arrested and dealt with by the Orange Childrens Court for offences of damaging property, trespassing and two offences of assault. He was placed on probation for twelve months.

19. These offences committed while in Cowra breached the good behaviour order which I made on 29 October 2012 and were relevant to my assessment of his progress under the deferred sentence order.

20. On 7 August 2013, I issued a warrant for BB's arrest, because of these and other matters and when he was arrested and appeared before me I remanded him in custody where he has remained.

21. I have set out in earlier sentencing remarks BB's personal history and background. I do not need to repeat it. It may be summarised as follows.

22. BB identifies himself as Aboriginal. He has had a disturbed childhood, where his mother and step-father were "full blown alcoholics" and he witnessed family violence perpetrated by his step-father on his mother.

23. The family moved about, but BB was largely left to his own devices, including having to "couch surf" at times. He has, however, a close connection with his step-sister and her children, though she faces challenges herself. BB has been made a ward subject to the care of Care and Protection Services, which was previously shared with his mother. That agency has now accepted the value of his contact with his step-sister.

24. BB enjoys sport, but has had a disrupted education, though he has recently been able to complete his Year 10.

25. He came into the Turnaround Program (see R v BB [2013] ACTSC 58 at [57]- [58]) and had been making some progress through that.

26. BB has a long and clearly entrenched drug problem which started when he was in primary school, Year 5, a very young age. This is a relevant factor because, as pointed out in Douglas v The Queen (1995) 56 FCR 465 at 470 and R v Henry [1999] NSWCCA 111; (1999) 106 A Crim R 149 at 197-8; [273], the moral culpability of a child of such a young age who, because of an abused background, became addicted cannot be equated with an adult or even a much older juvenile who, for self-gratification, chooses to experiment with drugs and becomes addicted. The capacity of a young person to exercise judgement would, in these circumstances, be impaired and, so, relevant to that person's culpability.

27. Nevertheless, BB has an unenviable criminal record, though it was what I described as "moderate" before the offences for which I am dealing with him now. It began in late 2009 with charges of assault, damage property and traffic offences. There were a total of thirteen offences, however, but in two court appearances. The current offences, however, now total twenty-nine offences, accumulated on his other offences which make an extraordinary number of offences for an offender not yet eighteen years old.

28. I have effectively been responding to BB's recent criminality since 14 February 2012 when I first sentenced him. Since then, there have been numerous breaches of bail and breaches of the good behaviour orders I then made, together with the additional offences committed in September 2012. Over this time, there has been some progress and some failures. BB usually commits to showing that he can keep out of trouble, but it does not seem to last.

29. There are, for example, a number of occasions when he has said or written along the following lines, as written on 8 November 2011:

My time in custody at Bimberi Youth Justice Centre has given me time to think of all the wrong things that I have done and how, to the best of my abilities, to change the road I am heading down.

I am very remorseful for what I have done and I am going to do the best I can to never do it again.

If you give me this one chance of bail I can guarantee that you will not regret it.

30. Unfortunately, the apparent remorse was not enough to keep him from breaching bail and the good behaviour order.

Every day in custody all I can think about is who I was and how much I've changed. I used to be a drug addict and because of that I was a criminal. I hate being labelled as a criminal, it is the worst feeling in the world, but it is my fault.

I can't change what I have done, but I can change what I am going to do. I am going to turn my life around, I am going to get a real job, have a [legitimate] car and my own family.

It is not all going to happen overnight, so I have to go step by step.

I know you are thinking why should you let me out, what's so different from last time.

I can tell you why. Being in custody has given me a long time to think about what I have done and why I did it.

The main reasons are drugs, and because I knew I had a drug problem I have sought certain help.

33. Again, there is some progress but also some deterioration or decline. Certainly, however, the strong commitments that are expressed in such letters to the Court do not seem to be maintained once BB is released from custody.

34. I had oral evidence from the father of BB's girlfriend. While I formed the view that he considered that BB was a bad influence on his daughter and that this had coloured his evidence, and that he seemed incapable of exercising or attempting to exercise any parental control, the evidence he gave was worrying. He gave evidence that BB had, in breach of his bail conditions and good behaviour order conditions, stayed overnight at his residence; that BB had used cannabis and synthetic cannabis, though he only referred to one occasion; and that he had consumed alcohol. He referred to what he said were strategies that BB used to avoid detection of drug use, though none of them seemed to me to be likely to achieve that objective. He referred to occasions when BB and his daughter would, he thought, engage in shoplifting. He also referred to BB describing Youth Justice and Care and Protection staff in derisory or derogatory terms.

35. In cross-examination, he agreed that his daughter had been in trouble with the law for a long time, well before she had met BB. There were some challenges to his evidence, which it is not possible, nor necessary, for me to resolve. He did admit that he had made no attempt to prevent or respond to the shoplifting that he said he witnessed or of which he was aware. He did not give any evidence of any reports he had made to Youth Justice, the police or other agencies of the activities which he said he witnessed. He did not give any evidence of efforts he had made, for example, to prohibit BB from staying at his house when he apparently knew that this was in breach of court orders.

36. I also had a number of Pre-Sentence Reports which showed both the progress that BB had made, but also his failures. It is not necessary or appropriate to provide a detailed analysis, though some examples are important.

37. Thus, during August 2013, he resided at Brindabella House and I had a report of his behaviour from 9 to 22 August 2013. It showed some challenging behaviour when he insisted on taking what was described as an "alpha male" role in the house, that he stayed out and did not return to the House as required and possible shoplifting. He started education programs at the Canberra Institute of Technology but only attended on two days. He used marijuana and broke some House Rules. He continues "to push the boundaries and rules of the program".

38. On the other hand, he completed a "work ready program" and attended the Steps to Success Program. He had gone out of his way to contact and visit his mother and "developed more patience and understanding towards their relationship". He attended a Steps to Success Program trip to the snow and "was able to demonstrate his maturity in keeping other residents in line while on the trip ... [and] gave him the opportunity to embrace his youth and show his love for snow sports". In one report, it is stated

[BB] acts very responsibly and domesticated [sic] when his girlfriend visits. He will cook and clean for her and ensure she enjoys her visits.

39. I also had earlier reports for the periods from March to August. They paint quite a different picture to that given in the oral evidence of his girlfriend's father. There are, however, some areas where there is room for consistency.

40. His behaviour was not perfect, but there were a number of positive comments and signs of progress, as well as failures.

41. The Pre-Sentence Report showed that BB was seeking to engage with education while in custody. He confirmed that, while in the community, he had been drinking alcohol regularly. He had engaged with a Youth Drug and Alcohol counsellor but had only attended four of nine appointments. When attending, he had engaged openly and honestly and his usage of drugs and alcohol had significantly decreased from the levels at the original assessment.

42. Even the most recent Pre-Sentence Report showed progress. For example, BB has completed the CHART program, which I understand to be the "Changing Habits and Reaching Targets" program, designed to support casework by Youth Justice Workers for young offenders with a high or very high risk of reoffending. I understand that it is a twelve module, evidence-based program that uses a problem-solving and cognitive behavioural approach to address the offender's criminogenic needs and "distorted thoughts", including by helping them to recognise the factors that have contributed to their offending and to increase their capacity to make more pro-social decisions, by developing and rehearsing relapse prevention techniques.

43. BB recognised that his behaviour had put his sentencing at risk and acknowledged that he felt "like an idiot" and had "thrown it all away".

44. He showed insight about his offending but recognised that he had "used up the opportunities and ... disappointed the Court too many times".

45. He has been assessed on the "Youth Level of Services/Case Management Inventory" at the high risk category.

46. There are two matters for which I have to deal with BB today. The first is the breach of his good behaviour order made when I suspended the sentence of imprisonment for the twenty-six offences committed between 1 September 2009 and 24 November 2011 (the first sentence). The other is the offences committed on 29 September 2012, for which I made a Deferred Sentence Order (the second sentence).

47. BB has pleaded guilty to all offences and this has to be taken into account. I do so. He has, to that extent accepted responsibility for his actions.

48. I have described, in R v PM [2009] ACTSC 24 at [53], the principles that apply when sentencing young offenders. These have also been expressed by the Victorian Court of Appeal in Azzopardi v The Queen (2011) 219 A Crim R 369 at 380-4; [34]-[43]. I shall apply them.

49. Mr A Williamson, who appeared for the Crown, submitted that BB had, since I first dealt with him, continually breached the orders I had made and, in the more recent breaches, had, by his absconding to Cowra and committing offences there, fundamentally breached the opportunity given to him by the deferred sentence order. There is much force in that submission. I do not resile from the general approach that young people, whose level of maturity is not yet adult (which must be considered), should be encouraged to reform, and that this will, on appropriate occasions, lead to breaches being overlooked if the overall trend is in a positive direction of reform.

50. There does, however, come a time when the accumulation of breaches needs a more severe response. In my view, the principal test is whether the breaches constitute offending, particularly serious offending. Since the criminal law is there to protect the community and ensure that its members can go about their affairs and develop their potential free from the intrusions that offending constitutes, this requires a more significant response.

51. I take into account the objective seriousness of the offending for which I originally sentenced BB. Regrettably, the offending on 27 September 2012 was of the same kind and, although there was no aggravated burglary offence then committed, the offending was not, in total, much less serious than the earlier offending. The more recent offending in New South Wales is of a different character and clearly, in the view of the court there, was not so serious, but it shows a continuing inability to comply with the rules of conduct set by the criminal law.

52. I take into account BB's personal circumstances. His disturbed home life is a relevant factor and must be given due weight. That, as the High Court has recently said in Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; (2013) 87 ALJR 1022, the effect of social deprivation, especially through childhood, does not diminish over time and is to be given full weight in sentencing in every case, even though there has been subsequent offending for which punishment is imposed, is relevant and to be taken into account.

53. I accept that there has been some progress in BB's reform, but that progress is marred and overshadowed by his failure to show genuine attempts to live within the rules that have been required of him and to show some progress in moving away from his offending behaviour whilst in the community.

54. Ms T Warwick, counsel for BB, submitted that he had received favourable reports from those who were responsible for him. I think that is a little generous. There are favourable comments in the reports that I have seen, but, at present, BB seems unable to transfer his attitudes and approach within Bimberi into the community for any length of time.

55. I do not know whether the attitude I have expressed through the response I have given to various breaches has encouraged him to believe he has a degree of impunity.

56. Those responses were based on the fact that the breaches were not matters for which he was charged with a criminal offence and where there was some progress still being made. The progress, however, seems to have slowed, and he is now offending further.

57. It seems to me that BB has not taken enough advantage of the opportunities I have given him to escape a sentence of some severity.

58. It is always necessary, however, to bear in mind a degree of proportion both to the offending behaviour and to the personal circumstances during the periods of conditional liberty. Certainly one breach, but even a number of breaches, of conditions to that liberty does not negate the progress that has been made though it may overwhelm the entitlement that that progress would otherwise give to a more lenient sentence.

59. In essence, Ms Warwick submitted that BB had "done more good things than bad". That is difficult to assess. The problem, however, is that much of what is good has been done while in custody and not in the community. He engaged well with his alcohol and other drugs counsellor, but attended less than half his appointments while he was in the community. He completed the CHART program, but that was while he was in custody. He continues to engage in low-level rule breaches. The reports from Brindabella House show breaches of curfew, failure to let the staff know where he is, reluctance and sometimes failure to attend employment and so on. There are good things and positive things, but I am not sure that they overshadow the underlying failure of BB to recognise that there are boundaries and rules with which he must comply.

60. In all the circumstances, it seems to me that he has not taken such advantage of the opportunities given to him that I can overlook the seriousness of his further offending or his breaches of the conditions of his good behaviour order.

61. Nevertheless, that does not mean that the sentences cannot make proper allowance for the progress that has been made and, ultimately, encourage further reform.

62. I consider that no other sentence than a period of full-time custody is appropriate. Nevertheless, the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) requires me to consider making a combination sentence, especially as I cannot set a non-parole period for BB.

63. I am also concerned that the offences for which I am now sentencing BB date back to 2009 and this should, so far as possible, not continue to hang over his head. I will achieve this by making, in effect, various sentences.

64. As there will be multiple sentences, I have carefully considered the length of each of the sentences to ensure that, when there are overlapping common elements between any of the offences, BB is not punished twice.

65. I have also considered whether the sentences should be partly or wholly concurrent because, for example, they are part of the same enterprise or otherwise.

66. I have then reviewed the length of the total term of imprisonment arrived at and ensured that the principle of totality is respected, and that the total sentence is adequate to reflect the criminality of the offences committed but not more than that; that the total sentence is not crushing and leaves open the realistic prospect of reform and hope for the achievement of BB's goals when he returns to the community. Where necessary to achieve this, I have adjusted the cumulation or concurrency of the individual sentences.

67. I confirm the convictions I entered for the offences for which I dealt with BB on 14 February 2012.

68. I am satisfied that BB breached the good behaviour order I imposed on 29 October 2012, made when I suspended sentence totalling two years and ten months' imprisonment by the offences committed on 4 August 2013 and by admitted failures to comply with lawful directions given to BB by the person delegated to supervise BB.

69. As required under s 110 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), I cancelled that order.

71. For the aggravated burglary at Page on 1 September 2009, I sentence BB to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2013.

72. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to four months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Page.

73. For the aggravated burglary at Braddon on 2 September 2009, I sentence BB to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 16 March 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to three months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Page.

74. For the theft of property from the aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 March 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the burglary at Braddon.

75. For the aggravated burglary at Kaleen on 20 February 2010, I sentence BB to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Braddon.

76. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to four months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Kaleen.

77. For the burglary at Cook on 20 December 2010, I sentence BB to seven months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Kaleen.

78. For the theft of property from that burglary, I sentence BB to three months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the burglary at Cook.

79. For the aggravated burglary at Reid on 10 April 2011, I sentence BB to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2013, that is, to be cumulative as to four months on the sentence for the burglary at Cook.

80. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to seven months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that aggravated burglary.

81. For the burglary also at Reid on 10 April 2011, I sentence BB to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 January 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Reid.

82. For the theft from that burglary, I sentence BB to three months' imprisonment to commence on 10 January 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the burglary.

83. For the burglary at Downer on 18 April 2011, I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 April 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the burglary at Reid.

84. For the theft of property from that burglary, I sentence BB to three months' imprisonment to commence on 10 April, 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that burglary.

85. That is a sentence of twenty months from 10 February 2013, to take into account pre-sentence custody, and to end on 9 October 2014 to be served by full-time custody.

86. For the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 22 April 2011, I sentence BB to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 10 December, 2013 to take into account pre-sentence custody and totality.

87. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 December 2013, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that aggravated burglary.

88. For the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 25 April 2011, I sentence BB to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 22 April 2011.

89. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 February 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for the aggravated burglary.

90. For the aggravated burglary in Kambah on 17 November 2011, I sentence BB to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Ngunnawal on 25 April 2011.

91. For the theft of property from that aggravated burglary, I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that aggravated burglary.

92. For the burglary at Greenway on 17 November 2011, I sentence BB to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the aggravated burglary at Kambah.

93. For the theft of property from that burglary, I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that burglary.

94. For taking and using a motor vehicle without authority on 21 November 2011, I sentence BB to ten months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to one month on the sentence for the burglary at Greenway.

95. For the burglary at Hawker on 24 November 2011, I sentence BB to eleven months' imprisonment to commence on 10 November 2014, that is, to be cumulative as to three months on the sentence for the taking and using the motor vehicle without consent.

96. For the theft of property from that burglary, I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 November 2014, that is, to be wholly concurrent on the sentence for that burglary.

97. For the offence of damaging property, I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 June, 2015, that is, to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for the burglary at Hawker.

98. I convict BB of dishonestly without consent riding in a motor vehicle between 29 September and 9 October 2012.

99. I sentence BB to eight months' imprisonment to commence on 10 August 2015, that is, to be cumulative as to four months on the sentence for the offence of damaging property.

100. I convict BB of the burglary at O'Connor on 30 November 2012.

101. I sentence BB to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 10 September 2015, that is, to be cumulative as to five months on the sentence for the dishonestly riding in a motor vehicle without consent.

102. I convict BB of damaging property on 30 November 2013.

103. I sentence BB to six months' imprisonment to commence on 10 May 2016, that is, to be cumulative as to two months with the sentence for the burglary.

106. I require BB to sign an undertaking to comply with the offender's good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of two years from 10 October 2014 with the following conditions:

(a) a probation condition that BB be subject to the supervision of the Director-General, or her delegate, for a period of two years or such lesser period as the person delegated to supervise BB should consider appropriate and that BB comply with all reasonable directions given by the person delegated to supervise BB, including directions as to residence, treatment and counselling for alcohol and other drugs, and education;

(b) a community service condition that BB complete 160 hours of community service work within twelve months from 10 October 2014.

I certify that the preceding one hundred and six (106) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Justice Refshauge.

Solicitor for the prosecution: ACT Director of Public Prosecutions

Solicitor for the defendant: Kim Bolas Criminal Law