Over 50 years of combined experience

Success in Courts Australia-Wide

6 x Convenient Locations across Sydney and NSW

Your options

Plead not guilty

In order to be convicted of this offence, the police must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

  1. You dealt with property;
  2. That there are reasonable grounds to suspect the property is the proceeds of crime

If any of the above elements cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt, then you will be found not guilty of the offence.

It the above elements can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, it is a defence if you satisfy the court that you had no reasonable grounds for suspecting that the property was proceeds of a crime.

Our experienced criminal lawyers will advise you of your prospects of successfully defending any charge brought against you and fight to have you found not guilty of the offence.

Plead guilty

If you agree with what the police are alleging against you, the way to get the best result is often to plead guilty as it demonstrates remorse and contrition as well as meaning that you will be entitled to a discount on your sentence. Alternatively, it may be the case that one of our experienced solicitors can negotiate with prosecutors for you to plead guilty to a less serious charge.

The offence of police pursuit carries a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment and/or a fine of $5,500. This is an offence that may in some circumstances be dealt with pursuant to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentence Procedure) Act, meaning no conviction will be recorded, there is no other penalty and you will have no criminal record. To find out more about a section 10, click here.

Generally, penalties that a court can impose for any criminal offence in NSW are:

Our client was a Singaporean National, who travelled to Australia to work as a courier of ‘very valuable goods’.

What he didn’t know was that the Australian Federal Police were conducting an operation for his apprehension.

He was approached by undercover police at Lidcombe in Sydney, searched and was found to have in his possession of 1.8 million dollars in cash. He was charged with ‘Recklessly Dealing with Proceeds of Crime’, under the Commonwealth Laws.

This carried a maximum term of 12 years imprisonment. Adam of our office argued the case with the Commonwealth DPP, submitting that the prosecution did not have a shred of evidence that the money was actually ‘the proceeds of crime’.

After a difficult time convincing the prosecution, they finally agreed to reduce the charge to “dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime’, a much less serious charge.

The case proceeded to sentence before Judge Soloman at Sydney District Court. Our client received a sentence of 9 months non parole. At that stage he had already served 7 months of his sentence, and was released 2 months after.

A terrific result for our client. He is back with his wife and three kids in Singapore.

Our client was charged with 2 counts of dealing with cash being the proceeds of crime, under the Victorian State Laws. His case was heard at Melbourne Magistrates Court in early 2013.

After a lengthy Victorian Police operation into money laundering by an alleged criminal syndicate, our client was caught with just over $900,000 in cash at Docklands, in Melbourne.

Adam of our office appeared at the hearing at Melbourne Magistrates Court.

Adam successfully argued that whilst there were ‘suspicions’ as to the origins of the money, the prosecution could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the money was actually proceeds of crime.

A terrific result for our client.

Our client was a Singapore national who was charged with “Dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime”, under s.400.9 of the Criminal Code (Cth).

Our client pleaded guilty to the money laundering of $250,000 in cash throughout banking institutions in Perth.

He was refused bail, due to his immigration status, and taken into custody in Melbourne Remand Centre.

After successfully negotiating the charges with the Commonwealth DPP, and reducing the overall amount of money laundered, the case proceeded to sentencing at Melbourne County Court on 27 February 2015. By that time our client had spent about 5 months in custody, bail refused.

After strong submissions, Judge Allan agreed that our client should be released immediately, and ordered that our client serve a jail sentence the length of which he had already spent in custody.

A fantastic result for our client, who was released from court that day, and is now back in Singapore with his wife and 3 children.

Our client was charged with supply of prohibited drug namely 9 grams cocaine and dealing with proceeds of crime in the amount of $9000.  These are both serious offences and a rule in sentencing in drug offences is that a full time custodial sentence is appropriate if a court finds someone has been trafficking to any substantial degree.

The matter proceeded to sentence at the Sydney District Court before Judge Bennett.  The prosecution argued that our client engaged in trafficking to a substantial degree and that full time custody was the only appropriate sentence.

We successfully argued that our client was not trafficking to a substantial degree and that our client demonstrated significant remorse and rehabilitation. The court agreed with our position that our client could serve his sentence by way of intensive corrections order (ICO)

Our client is currently serving his two year term of imprisonment within the community by way of ICO.