The Merit of Making an Aspirational Plea Offer Early in the Court Process

Case Overview

Andrew Halphen recently acted for a small business owner who was arrested at home shortly after the execution of a search warrant issued under the Drug Poisons and Controlled Substances Act.

He was charged with trafficking a drug of dependence (DOD) to a child, trafficking a DOD, supplying a DOD to a child, possessing a DOD, possessing prohibited weapons and possessing controlled weapons. 

Client's Criminal History

Given the client’s prior criminal history (he had a prior for trafficking a DOD for which he had received a community corrections order) and the seriousness of the charges before the court, he was at risk of a term of imprisonment. 

Defence Strategy

A view was formed that the client had an arguable defence to the trafficking charges, but that it was not likely to be successful. In that setting, it was decided that it would be of benefit to the client to make an aspirational plea offer to resolve the matter, but at the same time to prepare him for the offer to be rejected and for the case to remain before the court for an extended period of time. These matters were conveyed to the client, who instructed our office to make the offer with the understanding it was most unlikely to be accepted. ‍

Surprisingly, though, the offer was accepted very soon after it was made and the trajectory of the matter changed. The charges before the court were now far less serious – the client now faced possessing a DOD charge and possessing a prohibited weapon charge - such that his position was immeasurably different to what it had been. And things kept getting better for him when he got to court. He drew a kind-hearted reserve Magistrate at a suburban court with an otherwise poor roster. The client went from a term of imprisonment to unpaid community work to a fine.

Conclusion

This case demonstrates that making an aspirational plea offer early on in the court process is a worthwhile exercise in the right circumstances. 

Here the client was facing a number of court hearings and in all likelihood a term of imprisonment, but in the end he received a fine and attended court once.