Assault Occasioning Bodily Harm (AOBH)![]() Under the Criminal Code (Qld) any physical contact that occurs without the recipient’s consent is taken to be an assault on that person. Assault occasioning bodily harm is a more serious offence than common assault. Section 339 of the Criminal Code makes it an offence to unlawfully assault another and do them bodily harm. Bodily harm means any injury which interferes with the health or comfort of the victim. This has been accepted to include:
The standard maximum penalty for this offence is 7 years imprisonment. However, this maximum penalty increases to 10 years where, at the time of the assault:
It is important to keep in mind that while legislation sets out and prescribes the maximum penalty for an offence, when deciding what penalty should be imposed the court will take into consideration the nature of the offence, your unique personal circumstances, and your criminal history. There are a number of possible defenses that can be raised when charged with assault occasioning bodily harm. Some of these include:
Provocation is the most common raised defence and is relevant where the assault occurred because of some provocation by the victim that had reasonably deprived you of the power of self-control. In such instances however, the amount of force you used must have been proportionate to the provocation. If you have been charged with assault occasioning bodily harm and believe there may be a defence or are unsure of what penalties a court might impose in your case, it is necessary to contact a solicitor to discuss your chances of success. Our solicitors have extensive experience in this area and will be able to assist you in making sure you get the best result.
1 Comment
Charged with a minor drug offence?![]() If so, you may be eligible to receive a court diversion to attend a drug education and information session rather than receive a traditional penalty like a fine or probation order. Court diversion is aimed at diverting minor drug offenders from the criminal justice system. If you have been charged with a drug offence, contact us to discuss your options at a free case appraisal. Am I eligible for court drug diversion?![]() You may be eligible for a court diversion if you:
Unfortunately, if you have been offered two previous diversions in the past, including a diversion under the police diversion program, you are not eligible for a further diversion. What is an eligible drug offence? Eligible drug offences that allow you access to a court diversion program include:
Examples of minor amounts of drugs include:
How does the court drug diversion actually work?People under 17:
People 17 and over:
What happens in the drug education and information sessions? These sessions start with a session with a health service provider to prepare a personal plan about your drug taking behaviour. Further treatment is voluntary and not part of the recognizance order. This session is strictly confidential. If you like, a family member or friend may go with you to the drug education and information session. Do I still have to pay the offender levy? Yes. If you are found guilty of an offence in a Queensland court, you will have to pay the offender levy IN ADDITION to any penalty or sentence you receive. This applies even if no conviction is recorded. In the Magistrates Court the levy fee is $130.30 if a sentence is imposed on you. ![]() R v MEZZADRI: Our client was visited by Police on his premises following a report of a domestic dispute. In response to Police requesting of there were firearms on the premises, our client produced eight weapons, including a rifle with the serial number erased. Offences: 1 x unauthorized possession of firearms in aggravated circumstances (Max 15 years imprisonment); Court: Court of Criminal Appeal, New South Wales Prior Sentence Outcome: Suspended sentence on 1 year and 10 months. Appeal Outcome: The Crown appealed the prior sentence as too light - Appeal was dismissed. Overview: Our client was visited by Police on his premises following a report of a domestic dispute. In response to Police requesting of there were firearms on the premises, our client produced eight weapons, including a rifle with the serial number erased. Four of the firearms were prohibited, none of them were registered, and our client was unlicensed. Our client had come into possession of the firearms in several ways: some passed down by his father, others he had found in very bad condition. Three of the eight firearms were registered by our client in NT, and our client believed that all the weapons were unserviceable. Our client entered a plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity. Several character references were tendered on his behalf which detailed his good character, strong employment history, and his high unlikeliness to re-offend. At trial, despite police ballistics experts stating the weapons were in working order, we were able to successfully argue that this was not the case when the weapons were seized, which was accepted by the judge. This offence carried a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 20 years and a standard non-parole period of 10 years. Our client was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 1 year and 10 months – a significantly low penalty due to the unique circumstances of the case. On appeal, the Crown argued against this sentencing order, in particular the suspension of the sentence, claiming it was too lenient and was not serious enough given the nature of the offence. After submissions were made, we successfully defended our client’s ordered sentence and readily believe that it is more than adequate, given the circumstances of the offence. This matter highlights two very important points, particularly understanding the nuances of possessing firearms under the law, and the general obligations on persons not to possess restricted items. This general obligation is particularly important as our client was in possession of 4 restricted items. This invites a greater discussion of firearms and the law in Australia and what to consider when understanding Australia’s firearms and weapon laws. This is the summary of an actual case. Certain details have been omitted to protect the privacy of our client. We select and summarize cases which are informative and provide no guarantee that similar results are achievable in all cases. This summary does not constitute as legal advice and you should obtain legal advice specific to your matter and circumstances. If you are facing charges similar to the ones above, contact us for a free consultation. ![]() R v M: Our client ran an online adult pornography business that involved downloading large volumes of pornographic material and then sorting through it to extract relevant material... Offences: 1 x Using a carriage service to make available child pornography material (Max 15 years imprisonment); 1 x Possessing child exploitation material (Max 14 years imprisonment). Court: District Court in Brisbane Sentence Outcome: Released on own recognizance of good behaviour for 2 years, and no conviction recorded. Overview: The circumstances of this case are highly unusual and unique, making for a notable case and a legal precedent. Our client ran an online adult pornography business that involved downloading large volumes of pornographic material and then sorting through it to extract relevant material - this meant that some child exploitation or pornography material (CEM/CPM) was incidentally downloaded. Per protocol to protect children, any CEM/CMP identified was to be separated, kept isolated from external access, and then deleted. When receiving downloads of large amounts of pornography, our client made two unfortunate mistakes:
Our client engaged our office to assist him, where we argued that our client incidentally possessed CEM/CPM as part of the collection process, and inadvertently made it available, but with no criminal intent. We urged the Court to consider our client’s unblemished record with regards to CEM/CPM management and his efforts to safely isolate and remove the material. The fact that he only viewed a portion of the material in question also demonstrating he had no interest in it and was only negligently in possession. We were also able to argue that the Court should consider our client’s early plea of guilty, significant personal circumstances that occurred at the time of the offending, including the death and serious illness of loved ones, and psychological reports. The Court accepted our submissions and sentenced our client to be released on recognizance without sureties on the condition that he keeps the peace and is of good behaviour for two years for both offences and that no conviction be recorded for either offence. A forfeiture order was made against our client for the hard drives on which the CEM/CPM material was found, which we opposed. Usually, the hard drives would be forfeited and all records, non-offending or not, would be turned over; however, we were able to successfully argue that our client be able to download and copy any non-offending business or personal records under police supervision. This is the summary of an actual case. Certain details have been omitted to protect the privacy of our client. We select and summarize cases which are informative and provide no guarantee that similar results are achievable in all cases. This summary does not constitute as legal advice and you should obtain legal advice specific to your matter and circumstances. If you are facing charges similar to the ones above, contact us for a free consultation. ![]() Has this ever happened to you? You and your friends go out, someone gets a bit rowdy and has a run in with the Police, and while you’re trying to stop them, YOU get in trouble in the process? It’s more common than you think, and situations like this can quickly get out of control. The combination of heavy drinking and a sense of duty can make for a ruined night and further consequences down the road. In this case, we represented a couple who we’ll call Jim and Pam. For reasons which will be revealed, Jim was charged with contravening direction and obstructing police, and Pam was charged with committing a public nuisance, contravening a direction, and obstructing police. Jim and Pam were out at an event, got pretty drunk, and things got a little bit rowdy – Jim got into a fight with someone, so Pam got angry at Jim, and it all escalated quite a bit... Jim and Pam end up getting thrown out of the event by security and Police. As Jim and Pam are leaving, she starts slinging swears at Police. The Police read a direction to them both, stating they must leave the premises and move on by 300 meters otherwise they’ll be committing an offence and be arrested. While this direction is being read out, Pam keeps walking away from the Police, obstructing the Police’s duty to read the direction. The pair begin to move on however they don’t move far enough and are given a warning by Police to continue on or be arrested. The couple starts to move again, however Pam starts walking back to the Police and the event, leading her to be arrested. Jim starts to run after Pam, trying to stop her from walking back and getting arrested by Police. As Police yell at Jim to walk away from Pam, he refuses to listen and tries to defend his partner while resisting Police arrest. The pair were arrested and taken to the watchhouse and later served with notices to appear, being charged with the above offences. At sentencing, we were able to get Jim and Pam a pretty good deal, especially since Jim had a semi-relevant previous criminal history. We were able to argue that it should be taken into consideration that they were both heavily intoxicated and in an agitated state – whilst this is not an excuse for their behaviour, it certainly lends a bit of an explanation. Jim was served with a $500 fine and a recorded conviction, whilst Pam got fined $1000, 40 hours of community service but with no conviction recorded. If you’re thinking that it seems that Pam got the worse end of the stick even though this was her first offence, you’d be correct since Pam (despite being a bit of a goody-two-shoes) essentially instigated the incident, not Jim. Having the best representation to explain your situation to the court can make all the difference in sentencing. If you’ve been like Pam and Jim or in a similar incident, do one of the only right things they did and contact Brisbane Criminal Lawyers for a free consultation. This is the summary of an actual case. Certain details have been omitted to protect the privacy of our client. We select and summarize cases which are informative and provide no guarantee that similar results are achievable in all cases. This summary does not constitute as legal advice |
The BrisCrimLaw Blog.The original Brisbane Criminal Lawyers. And we say the best Criminal Defence & Domestic Violence Solicitors in Brisbane. If you have a criminal or domestic violence matter, call 1800 200 357 to organise your free case appraisal.
Archives
October 2022
Categories |