Our expert criminal lawyers for break and enter and committing a serious indictable offence can help you:
- Obtain bail.
- Be found not guilty.
- Receive a lenient sentence, like no conviction and no prison.
You will be represented by a team of award-winning criminal lawyers, with 500+ five-star Google reviews, who offer fixed fees and free first consultations.
You can read our reviews here.
Break and Enter
Break, enter and commit a serious indictable offence is one of the most serious property offences in NSW. It involves unlawfully entering a property and committing a further serious offence inside.
What is Break, Enter and Commit a serious indictable offence
A person commits the offence if they:
- Break and enter a dwelling-house or other building; and
- Commit a serious indictable offence inside.
What the police must prove
To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:
- You entered a building or dwelling-house
- The entry was intentional and unlawful
- You committed a serious indictable offence
What Does Break Mean?
Breaking can occur in two ways:
- Actual breaking, forcing entry through doors, windows, locks, or gates
- Constructive breaking, gaining entry through fraud, threats, intimidation, or unauthorised use of a key
Simply entering through an already open door or window may not amount to a “break”.
Pleading not guilty
If you plead not guilty, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you:
- Broke into the property (actual or constructive breaking); and
- Entered the building, and
- Committed a serious indictable offence inside.
If the prosecution cannot prove any one of these elements, you must be found not guilty.
You can read more information about pleading not guilty here.
Common defences include:
- No breaking (e.g. entry through an open door)
- No entry or lack of evidence placing you at the scene
- No serious indictable offence committed
- Identification issues (wrong person identified)
- Reasonable alternative explanation for forensic evidence
Pleading guilty
If you plead guilty, our focus is on achieving the most lenient outcome possible. We negotiate with the police to reduce the charge or negotiate the agreed facts.
You can read more about pleading guilty here.
The maximum penalty for breaking into any house and committing a serious indictable offence is 14 years’ imprisonment.
Do I need references?
We believe references are an extremely important part of a plea of guilty in court. Read about court processes and how to write a good character reference.
Contact Australian Criminal Law Group
Our criminal lawyers, with 500+ five-star Google reviews, can beat your break-and-enter-with-intent charge or obtain a lenient sentence for you if you plead guilty.
Call us on (02) 8815 8167 for your free first conference or submit a website enquiry.
Case studies
Not guilty – forensic evidence challenged
Our lawyer represented a client who was charged with Break, enter and steal. His DNA was found on a cigarette in the property of a person whose house had been broken into. And their property was allegedly found on our client. Our criminal lawyer submitted that there was a reasonable hypothesis consistent with evidence, namely the cigarette had entered the yard either by the wind or on someone’s shoe. It was submitted there was no evidence the property (an iPod music player) was not linked to the victim by its serial number or even a music track list. The Magistrate found our client not guilty.
Not guilty – no “break” established
Our lawyer represented a client accused of breaking into a retail store in Westfield. CCTV showed someone sliding through a gap in a glass sliding door. Our client had been arrested with the safe of the store in his car following a police pursuit immediately after the store was entered. Our solicitor argued there was no evidence at all of a break because our client had simply walked in. The Magistrate agreed the offence had not been made out and our client was found not guilty.
Not guilty – identification issues
Our lawyer represented a client charged with breaking and entering an underground carpark in the company of two others. The police relied on CCTV to identify the client. He argued that it was impermissible for the police officer to identify his client because that was the job of the Magistrate. The Magistrate agreed and said there was no way he could be sure that the person in the footage was our client. He found our client not guilty of all charges.
Not guilty – joint enterprise rejected
Our lawyer represented a client charged with breaking and entering an RSL as part of a joint criminal enterprise with another person. It was alleged our client was a lookout sending text messages to another accused person to let them know the coast was clear. Criminal lawyer Joe Correy argued that it wasn’t unusual for young people to have their faces glued to their phones and the timing was no more than a coincidence. The Magistrate agreed and found our client not guilty.
No jail
Our lawyer represented a client charged with Break and enter with intent to commit serious indictable offence. The evidence against the client consisted of a number of police officers identifying him from CCTV. The client also said in an interview that the person in the CCTV looked like him (but not admitting it was him). Our solicitor relied on legal principles that the police were in no better position than the magistrate to identify the accused. Therefore, their opinion of who was is the CCTV was irrelevant. The principle that a statement someone looks like someone is never enough to prove identification beyond reasonable doubt. The magistrate found our client not guilty.
No jail – strong subjective case
Our lawyer represented a 21-year-old man who was charged with an aggravated break and enter with intent to commit an indictable offence. He was able to paint a more favourable picture for the accused. He cited significant provocation on the part of the alleged victim. Our lawyer convinced the court that his client was simply being a person looking to inflict damage on the property. The strong subjective material provided by the defence allowed for his client to receive no jail and only a good behaviour bond.
No jail
Our lawyer represented a man charged with 25 offences including six aggravated break and enters and drug offences. He negotiated for half the charges to be withdrawn. Because the man was a lifelong drug user who wanted to change, he also had his client bailed from prison to drug court then a residential rehabilitation centre. He never went back to prison.