Our Result - Case Study - Firearms written by James Caldicott
Aggravated Possession of a Class A Firearm.
Our client was charged with one count of Aggravated Possession of a Class A Firearm, Impersonating a Police Officer and Possession of Offensive Weapon. He was arrested by Star Force Officers after having driven a vehicle which displayed red and blue lights giving an impression that he was a police officer. Upon being searched by officers on his arrest they located a loaded Class A Firearm in his boot along with an offensive weapon namely a Samurai Sword in the backseat of the car. There was also a co-accused who was arrested along with him. Upon meeting with our client he provided instructions to the effect that the inference drawn by Prosecution as to the seriousness of the matter and that although pleading guilty to possession instructed to put a different factual basis to Prosecution.
The case proceeded through the committal Court and discussions and negotiations were had with Prosecution to the effect that any associated drug matters he was charged with were unsubstantiated and could not amount to possession but more importantly that any plea to the possession of the firearm and other conduct was to be done on an agreed factual basis.
Our client had spent prior to a successful application for bail two months in custody given the seriousness of the offence and until the resolution of the matter some five months on home detention bail.
The matter resolved by way of an agreed factual basis and withdrawal of all associated drug matters. The summary agreed upon by Prosecution and Defence Counsel mitigated the seriousness of the offence and the Judge of the District Court agreed that in the usual course although an immediate term of imprisonment is warranted that in this matter given the circumstances put to the Court that a suspended sentence was warranted.
Client received a bond to be of good behaviour with a term of imprisonment suspended on the basis that he would enter into a bond to be of good behaviour for a period of 12 months.
This was a good outcome as our client was able to avoid immediate imprisonment and the bond which in the usual course would carry with it supervision did not in this instance given our client’s good prospects of rehabilitation.
James Caldicott acted on our client’s behalf in the District Court of South Australia.