Criminal lawyers for Goods in custody
Our criminal lawyers know how to beat Goods in custody charges, which is an offence that many police do not understand and incorrectly use against our clients.
Goods in custody offences can be beaten where we establish that there is no basis to suspect the goods being stolen, or you had no reasonable grounds for suspecting a good was stolen, or the you have evidence the goods are not stolen (a receipt or you telling the court how the good was obtained). There are also several technicalities that we use to beat this charge.
If you intend to plead guilty, our criminal lawyers have a proven track record of not only keeping our clients out of jail but also having no conviction recorded for Goods in custody charges.
How do I beat a charge of Goods in custody?
You will be found not guilty of the offence of Goods in custody if the police cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt the following elements:
- 1. You:
- Had anything in his or her custody; or
- You had anything in the custody of another person; or
- You had anything in or on premises, whether belonging to or occupied by yourself or not, or whether that thing is there for your use or the use of another; or
- You give custody of anything to a person who is not lawfully entitled to possession of the thing.
- And that thing may be reasonably suspected of being stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained.
Where the police allege you had custody of a good on a premises but the good is found in a communal place, police must negate possession on the part of any other person, e.g. other occupants of the house which you live or other people who have access to a car.
If you agree that you have committed the offence (and the police are able to prove so), it is best to plead guilty as you will normally receive a discount on your sentence, and it will demonstrate remorse and contrition. Alternatively, it may be the case that one of our experienced solicitors can negotiate with prosecutors for you to plead guilty to less serious facts or even a less serious charge.
Goods in custody carries a maximum penalty of six months imprisonment in the Local Court. However, these penalties are typically reserved for the worst offenders. Our solicitors have a proven track record of not only keeping our clients out of jail but also, depending on the seriousness of the allegation, having the offence dealt with by way of section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, meaning no conviction will be recorded, there is no other penalty and you will have no criminal record.
You can read about all the sentencing options that a court has, including having no conviction recorded.
Do I need references?
We believe references are an extremely important part of a plea of guilty in court. To find out more about how to write a good reference, click here.
Why choose Australian Criminal Law Group?
Our criminal lawyers are experts at obtaining the best outcome possible for Goods in custody offences. For these offences, a good lawyer can be the difference between a conviction and no criminal record and freedom or jail. To read more about Australian Criminal Law Group, click here.
To discuss your Goods in custody charge, call Australian Criminal Law Group at our Sydney, Parramatta, and Blacktown offices or make a website inquiry today.
Australian Criminal Law Group appeared for an accused person charged with Goods in Custody of a phone. He had been charged with having the phone in his personal custody when the phone was found in his car. Our solicitor submitted to the Magistrate that the Accused person had been charged with the wrong offence and the charge was dismissed and our client was found not guilty.
Mr Correy appeared for an accused person who had been found with $4000.00 dollars in his custody. At the time of his arrest, another person had jumped from a car and fled leaving a quantity of drugs near the car. Mr Correy submitted there was no reason to suspect the money on the Accused person he represented was unlawfully obtained on account of the conduct of another. The Magistrate agreed and dismissed the charge.
Mr Correy represented a man who had been charged after he admitted that he was the owner of a TV that was being transported in a truck. The truck was not being driven by him. Mr Correy wrote to the police and pointed out that he was charged with the wrong goods in custody offence and they had no power to lay the correct one because six months had passed. The police withdrew the charge.