ACT Criminal Law
National Criminal Law
NSW Criminal Law
QLD Criminal Law
VIC Criminal Law
WA Criminal Law
My legal matter concerning an application for a Domestic Violence Order was managed by Mr Thomas Allen. I am grateful for the outcome he obtained. Without Mr Allen and his ongoing support, I would be certain of a different result. It has been an extremely stressful period. Mr Allen’s astute ability to liaise on my behalf and his expertise was invaluable and for which I am grateful as I am now able to move forward. Thanking you
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Armstrong Legal and specifically Mr Thomas Allen for representing me in my recent case. At the outset, I would like to thank Mr Allen for the very professional delivery of his legal service. From the first time that I met Mr Allen, I was very impressed with his demeanour and delivery as he made me feel at ease knowing the severity of my case. Mr Allen not only gave me the possible positive outcomes of the case but also the realisation of the worst-case scenario as far as sentencing goes. … I will certainly be recommending Armstrong Legal to any of my friends or family needing representation in criminal matters. Thank you so very much.
Thank you for your representation and help. Fingers crossed for the next step and parole. I just want to say that from the first phone call to your office, your service has been outstanding and have put my mind at ease. I am glad I picked your number to ring.
Thank you Armstrong Legal, the lawyers that have helped over the past 3 years but more importantly, thank you to Thomas Allen for the major part you and Mr Buckland played. Cannot thank you enough. Cheers.
Hi all. I would like to thank Ms Lisa Riley for all her help with my legal issues this past month. It was the most harrowing experience of my life and thanks to her expertise, professionalism and knowledge of the law, I came out almost unscathed. I have no hesitation in recommending Lisa Riley and Armstrong Legal if you need help. The service is amazing and the cost was very minimal for the great outcome. Thank you Lisa for helping me in the most difficult time.
I just want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. My whole life I was thrown away, you made me feel like I did mean something. I could not have asked for a better lawyer. Your compassion and love for your job is inspiring. Your upfront and honesty were muchly appreciated, you are a beautiful person. Thank you for not giving up on me and thank you for all the work you put in. I wish you all the best for the future and I will be recommending you to everyone I know. You're amazing!!!!
I just wanted to thank you for representing me on Monday, I was overjoyed & relieved with the outcome. I don’t think it could have gone any better. All the best, I hope you got to celebrate this one instead after work, you forever made a difference in my life.
I know I thanked you before we parted company but please allow me to reiterate in writing my sincere deepest thanks for defending me in court today. … Armstrong Legal certainly has a great Lawyer you are a credit to the company and I'm quite sure you will secure a very successful future! … My Kindest Regards and Thanks
Throughout Angela has been the consummate professional. She maintained a calm, yet strong demeanour remained informative and completely open in her communication and took complete ownership of the situation. We felt confident we finally had an advocate to steer us out of the nightmare we were in, and she did so with great respect and sincerity. I cannot speak more highly of Angela. She has literally rescued our family from what looked very much like a hopeless future.
Words can’t describe how grateful I am to Trudie Cameron being my solicitor and to Andrew Tiedt presenting my case in the court. They both have been very supportive and amazingly professional and effective. I’ve got an absolutely fantastic outcome I couldn’t even dream about.
Soon after meeting Andrew I knew he was the solicitor I wanted to handle my matter. He immediately sprang into action which brought me stability and hope during a tumultuous time in my life. Andrew was never afraid to give me straight answers to my tough questions which is a true mark of integrity. He is clearly at ease in the court environment and I believe his calm and measured demeanour went a long way to helping me secure the best result from my day in court. I would certainly recommend you approach Andrew if you need assistance.
"Andrew Tiedt was very professional and considerate to personal circumstances and gave sound advice that resulted in the best outcome possible. Highly recommended."
Co-operating With Police (Qld)
Sentencing in Queensland is governed by the Penalties and Sentencing Act 1992. The sentencing court must take into account the level of assistance given by an offender to police investigating an offence. Sections 13A and 13B of the Act cover co-operation with police in return to a reduced sentence. A sentence can be reduced by up to half if an offender has undertaken to co-operate with police, or has already co-operated.
Before sentencing, a party to the proceeding must notify the judge’s associate or the court clerk that the offender has undertaken to co-operate with police, and that written or oral submissions or evidence about this will be provided to the court.
After an offender is invited to address the court, the offender’s written undertaking to co-operate with police must be handed up to the court, and any party can hand up submissions about a reduction of sentence. If oral submissions or evidence is to be presented about the reduction in sentence, the court must be closed for this.
The penalty must be stated in open court, then the judge or magistrate must close the court to announce that the sentence is to be reduced. They must then seal by court order the written undertaking and a record of evidence and submissions made about the reduction of sentence. The judge or magistrate can make an order prohibiting publication of all or part of the proceeding or the name and address of any witness after considering:
- the safety of any person;
- the extent to which the detection of similar offences may be affected;
- the need to guarantee the confidentiality of information given by an informer.
These procedural requirements aim to protect the safety of offenders who have co-operated with police and to encourage such co-operation.
If an offender has already co-operated with police, the same procedure applies. However, instead of a written undertaking from the offender, an affidavit from police must be provided to the court. The affidavit must state the nature, extent and usefulness of the co-operation given by the offender. The co-operation must be deemed to have been “significant” to be considered as a factor in reducing a sentence.
R v TAS (2020)
In this case, a man (who cannot be named for legal reasons) was sentenced to 10 years in prison after he pleaded guilty in the Supreme Court to trafficking dangerous drugs with a serious organised crime circumstance of aggravation. Between 2014 and 2017 he had trafficked about 25-30kg of methamphetamine between Brisbane and Mackay for a drug syndicate.
Without the sentenced reduction applied under section 13A, TAS would have received a prison term of 18 years. Section 161S of the Act specifies that section 13A applies to an offender convicted of an offence committed with a serious organised crime circumstance of aggravation only if the offender co-operates in proceedings about a major criminal offence, and the co-operation will be of significant use.
In her sentencing remarks in open court, the sentencing judge accepted that TAS’s admissions to police “went significantly beyond the information which police had from their surveillance operations” and beyond information police had obtained from “very comprehensive statements” from a co-offender. Her Honour accepted TAS”s admissions entitled him to “special leniency”.
R v PBH (2019)
In this case, a man (who cannot be named for legal reasons) was sentenced to 6 years in prison after he pleaded guilty in the Supreme Court to trafficking dangerous drugs with a serious organised crime circumstance of aggravation.
Without the sentence reduction applied under section 13A for co-operating with police, PBH would have received a prison term of 18 years. As with the case of R v TAS, section 161S of the Act came into play.
R v Thompson (1994)
In this case, Thompson was convicted of more than 2000 property offences, which included the theft of more than $3.24 million in property. Police told the court that without his co-operation, Thompson would have been charged with fewer than 20 offences. Thompson also supplied information about other offenders which was of “great value”. His Supreme Court sentence of 20 years in prison was reduced to 12 years on appeal, with the sentencing judge stating:
“The result is a great reduction in the sentence which would have been appropriate but for the co-operation we have mentioned. The reason for the magnitude of the reduction is the corresponding magnitude of the offender’s co-operation, not only in voluntarily bringing to the attention of the police nearly all the offences of which he has been convicted, but because he has run the risks involved in providing highly valuable information about offenders other than himself.”
For advice or representation in any legal matter, please contact Armstrong Legal.
A control order is a court order to prevent, restrict or disrupt a person’s involvement in serious crime. It can…
The maxim of “double jeopardy” means no one can be prosecuted twice for the same offence. The law is stated…
In Queensland, the Criminal Proceeds Confiscation Act 2002 allows a court to order that property suspected of being the proceeds…
201 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000
575 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
91 North Quay
Brisbane QLD 4000
Nishi, 2 Phillip Law Street
Canberra ACT 2601
22 St Georges Terrace Perth