THE STATE OF TASMANIA v CHRISTOPHER JOHN CARROLL 29 JULY 2025
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE SHANAHAN CJ
The State has applied, pursuant to s 42AI(1) of the Sentencing Act 1997, to cancel a home detention order in respect of the respondent, Christopher John Carroll, date of birth 19 of April 1990.
Mr Carroll, you were convicted of a single count of assault contrary to s 184 of the Criminal Code before Acting Justice Marshall on 3 February 2025 and, upon your plea of guilty, you were sentenced to six months’ home detention commencing on 3 February 2025.
The home detention order made by Acting Justice Marshall on 3 February 2025 was subject to all the core conditions legislated under the Sentencing Act including that you not commit an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment, it also had the following special conditions:
(a) You – being the respondent – must during the operational period of the order remain at [address suppressed] during the times of 8pm to 8am unless approved by a Probation Officer.
(b) You must report to Community Corrections, Hobart, Level 1, 75 Liverpool Street, Hobart for your induction into this order no later than 10am Tuesday, 4 February 2025.
(c) You must during the operational period of the order maintain in operating condition an active mobile phone service, provide the contact details to Community Corrections and be accessible for contact through this device at all times.
(d) You must submit to the supervision of a Community Corrections Officer as required by that officer.
(e) You must not during the operational period of the order take any illicit or prohibited substances; illicit and prohibited substances include any controlled drug defined by the Misuse of Drugs Act 2001 and any medication containing an opiate, benzodiazepine, bupropion, hydrochloride or pseudoephedrine, unless you have written evidence from a medical professional that you have been prescribed the relevant medication.
(f) You must not, during the operational period of the order, consume alcohol and you must, if directed to do so by a police officer or Community Corrections Officer, submit to a breath test, urine test or other test for the presence of alcohol.
You attended Community Corrections on 4 February 2025 and participated in an induction process.
On 4 March 2025, you breached curfew by leaving your home detention residential address at approximately 8.31pm and attending [address suppressed] before returning home at approximately 8.40pm. Community Corrections called your phone and left a message when you did not answer. You called back at 8.45pm and advised that you were stressed and said words to the effect of “yes, I technically did the wrong thing” and accepted that you had breached curfew.
On 21 March 2025, you breached curfew by leaving your home detention residential address at approximately 1.13am, travelling north through Claremont and onto the Brooker Highway, reaching Upper Hilton, Austins Ferry and turning around heading back to your address, arriving home at approximately 1.19am. Community Corrections called your phone and left a message when you did not answer. You called back at 1.24am and advised that you had needed to take your car for a test run to make sure that you had fixed it. You noted you had gone at night because you would be busy with your kids in the morning. You stated that you were stressed about the curfew breach being passed onto your probation officer.
On 31 March 2025, you pleaded guilty to four breaches of a family violence order. The date of the offending was 30 March 2025. The offending consisted of you being within 50 metres of the protected person, [name suppressed], and the protected person’s residential address, and contacting the protected person by text message and phone and stating, “Yeah, I know where you are.”
A conviction was recorded in relation to each charge and you were sentenced to a global fine of $500, plus costs of $78.54. The charges were recorded as family violence offences pursuant to s13A of the Family Violence Act 2004.
On 3 May 2025 you again breached curfew, this time by attending 381 Main Road, Glenorchy, the location of the Paddy Wagon Irish Pub, after 8pm. Community Corrections called your phone at 8.11pm and left a message to call back when you did not answer. At 8.13pm, Community Corrections attempted to call you again. You departed the Paddy Wagon at approximately 8.54pm and returned to your residential address at approximately 9pm.
On 4 June 2025, you pleaded guilty to one breach of a family violence order by contacting the protected person, [name suppressed], via the social media application, Snapchat, on 11 April 2025. You were convicted and ordered to pay a fine of $500, plus costs. The offence was recorded as a family violence offence pursuant to s13A of the Family Violence Act 2004.
On 18 June 2025, you pleaded guilty to 11 breaches of a family violence order. The offending consisted of being within 50 metres of the protected person, [name suppressed]; being within 50 metres of her address; contacting her on Snapchat; and abusing her both in person and via Snapchat. On 23 May 2025, you verbally abused the protected person by saying, “You’re a slut. You’re a fucking whore. Look at the way you dress. You stay away from the fucking kids.”
On 7 June 2025, you sent a message to the protected person via Snapchat, calling her, “Just a cum bag. A fucking slut and a cheap whore.” Shortly after, you posted a video of yourself via Snapchat calling her a, “Fucking whore pig. A dirty little slut. Fucking nasty.” And saying, “I hope you catch AIDS.”
As I understand it that matter is adjourned to the 1 August 2025 for sentence. The home detention order remains in force until 3 August 2025.
This application is made under s 42AI(1) of the Sentencing Act, and that section deals with breaches of a home detention order. Under s 42AI(6):
(6) If –
(a) an application is made under subsection (1) in relation to an offender in respect of whom a home detention order is or was in force; and
(b) a court has found the offender guilty of an offence; and
(c) the offender has, by committing the offence, breached a condition of the home detention order referred to in section 42AD(1)(a); and
(d) an application was not made under section 42AJ in relation to the offence –
The court to which the application is made under subsection (1) must deal with the application as if the application were an application made to the court under section 42AJ and the court were the court that found the offender guilty of the offence.
Section 42AJ(5):
(5) A court to which an application in relation to an offender is made under subsection (1) or, if the application is adjourned under subsection (3) to another court, that other court, must, if the new offence of which the offender has been found guilty is an offence that is punishable by imprisonment –
(a) cancel the home detention order, if it is still in force, and, if it considers it appropriate, any other order in respect of the offence or offences in relation to which the home detention order was made; and
(b) whether or not the home detention order is still in force, impose on the offender any sentence (other than a home detention order) that the court could have imposed on the offender had it just found the offender guilty of the offence, or offences, in respect of which the home detention order was made.
I am satisfied that there are no exceptional circumstances that would bring this matter within s 42AJ(6), which means that I am bound by the terms of s 42AJ(5). That, in turn, means I am obliged to cancel the home detention order and re-sentence you within the terms of s 42AJ(5)(b). In doing so, if I consider it appropriate, I am authorised to make any other order in respect of the offence or offences that the court could have imposed when you were originally sentenced by Acting Justice Marshall.
Upon the sentencing hearing, your counsel accepted that I had no choice but to cancel the home detention order.
By way of mitigation I was asked to consider options outside an immediate term of imprisonment. I was asked to take into account the 144 days of the six month home detention order during which you were compliant. To be fair, your counsel acknowledged that you had not always been compliant, and estimated the rate of compliance at 96 per cent. Of course, home detention orders are to be obeyed and offenders cannot choose what portions or aspects with which they are prepared to comply. The breaches in this instance were regular and with some frequency, whatever percentage of time that represents.
As to the sentencing disposition I was told that you are now 35 years of age. You are indigenous. Further, that just prior to the home detention order being made, you had a breakdown of your 13-year relationship with your former partner. There are reciprocal family violence orders in place. You have retained the care of your three children, who are six, eight and twelve.
Since being on the home detention order all the children remain in your care. You own your own home, and that was the house nominated for home detention purposes. You are the sole person responsible for the paying of that mortgage, although I will make some remarks about your employment in a moment. I note those matters were all before Acting Justice Marshall when he made the home detention order. Which raises the question why you have chosen to breach the order and thus come back before this Court.
It was put on your behalf that if you were sentenced to any lengthy term of imprisonment, it is likely that the mortgage would default, as you do not have anybody else to pay for that mortgage, rendering yourself homeless upon release, and which would cause significant issues for your children. They are matters you should have thought of before you embarked on the conduct which breached the home detention order.
It was submitted that I could consider sentencing you to a period of suspended imprisonment. Of course, if I were to do that and you continue on the course that you have previously taken, you are likely to end up in gaol in any event.
Further, it was put that during the period of home detention, the reality of the breakdowns of your previous relationship manifested in your poor mental health. Since your last offending you have engaged with your general practitioner, and you are now taking medication as prescribed. It is said that you are seeing a positive change in your mental health since that time.
It was submitted on your behalf that if I was considering a suspended period of imprisonment, I could have you assessed for a Community Corrections order or make such an order, including an order as to community service as well.
The State’s position was that a suspended sentence is not likely to be an appropriate substitute for a home detention order in circumstances where you were not able to comply with the home detention order imposed by Acting Justice Marshall.
I am told that your mental health issues had changed since the home detention report, which was presented to Acting Justice Marshall, and that your employment had changed. You are currently not working, you receive the family tax benefit and you also have savings. I am also told that you have self-referred to Anglicare for counselling in the context of the breakdown of your relationship and also in relation to your previous substance abuse issues, in terms of alcohol specifically.
I am told your children attend school and that you do have some family members in the immediate community that can assist such that you could complete some community service. However, you suffer from slipped discs from a pushbike crash, arthritis, bone function and ichthyosis. You have medication prescribed for those conditions. You suffer from anxiety and depression, although the home detention report in front of Acting Justice Marshall suggested that they had been significantly improved. You also have issues with alcohol abuse.
I was urged to consider a suspended sentence with conditions and it was conceded by your counsel that the available sentencing options were either a suspended term of imprisonment or immediate imprisonment. I was asked to take into account four nights that you have spent in custody.
In reply the State drew my attention to s 42AJ(7) of the Sentencing Act, which provides that in determining how to deal with an offender after the cancellation of a home detention order under that section, “The court must take into account the extent to which the offender had complied with the home detention order before its cancellation or while it was still in force.”
Your breaches of the previous home detention order were frequent and showed a lack of concern for the consequences. Those breaches suggest the need for a significant penalty.
The State did not oppose the order seeking an addendum report from Community Corrections.
I now have an addendum report dated 18 July 2025. The report recorded your cravings for alcohol in March of 2025. On 9 April 2025 you disclosed that you were continuing to consume alcohol. On 23 April 2025 you disclosed to Community Corrections that you were struggling with your mental health and had financial pressure restricting you from seeking help.
On 20 May 2025 you reported improving mental health following prescription of medication. You and your children were involved in a car accident on 23 May 2025, some three days later. The addendum report records that Tas Police, on 23 May 2025, reported that you returned a breath analysis of 0.156 for the presence of alcohol in your blood on that date. You attributed the accident on 23 May 2025 to a mental breakdown because you had been prescribed inadequate dosages of prescribed medication.
On 29 May 2025 you completed an intake with Alcohol and Drug Services when you gave a verbal assent to a referral to Anglicare. You were released on 18 June 2025 after having been arrested for family violence related matters. On 25 June 2025 you disclosed doubling your dose of prescribed medication without the approval of your doctor.
You have a very poor record of compliance with the home detention order which is outlined in some detail in the addendum report.
There are two assessments in the addendum report of particular significance. The first is that whilst you are deemed suitable for community based supervision, you have been identified as requiring a high level of supervision and intervention and that the level of risk is rising. Community Corrections anticipate interventions relating to family violence behaviours, negative relationship with alcohol and offending behaviours would be beneficial should a period of supervision be warranted.
However, Community Corrections hold significant concerns as to your ability to remain compliant for the remainder of the home detention order. They also hold concerns regarding your escalating family violence behaviours and the risks to the victim, your children and the community. Your attitude towards the home detention order has been assessed as poor.
In these circumstances I am obliged to cancel the home detention order and to re-sentence you. I impose one sentence. I am not satisfied that a disposition that would release you into the community is warranted in circumstances where you pose an escalating risk to your children and those protected by family violence orders. You have a very poor record of compliance with community based court orders. I hereby sentence you to three months’ imprisonment to be served immediately. In imposing that sentence I have taken into account the portion of the home detention order that you have served, albeit with poor compliance.