the higher courts between January 2012 and June 2013 was 24 months. The median in the subsequent 18 months was unchanged at 24 months. Figure 6 the duration, by quarter, of CCOs where a CCO was the principal sentence measured by the median and the 95th percentile. The 95th percentile is the point that 95% of observations in a set of data fall below and 5% of observations fall above. Thus the 95th percentile is a good indicator of the upper extreme of values. While the median remained constant over much of the three-year period (at 24.0 months), the 95th percentile declined in the September quarter (41.3 months) and the December quarter (36.0 months) of 2014. This suggests that fewer CCOs of above three years’ duration were imposed in the second half of 2014 than from the June quarter of 2013 to the June quarter of 2014. Figure 6: Median and 95th percentile duration, by quarter, of CCOs where a CCO was the principal sentence, higher courts, January 2012 to December 2014 Quarter Median 95th percentile 2012 18 36.0 June 2012 24 36.0 September 2012 24 48.0 December 2012 18 36.0 March 2013 24 36.0 June 2013 24 48.0 September 2013 24 48.0 December 2013 24 48.0 March 2014 24 48.0 June 2014 24 48.0 September 2014 24 41.3 December 2014 24 36.0 Changes in the use of the combined CCO–imprisonment sentence Legislation that came into operation in September 2014 enhanced the courts’ ability to combine a CCO with an imprisonment by increasing the maximum length of imprisonment with which a CCO could be combined. Figure 7 shows quarterly data for the number of combined CCO–imprisonment sentences imposed between January 2012 and December 2014. There was a marked increase in the use of the combined sentence in the December quarter of 2014 when 61 combined CCO–imprisonment sentences were imposed compared with just 18 in the
Summary and conclusion This report has examined trends in the use of CCOs and sentences more generally over the period January 2012 to December 2014. Over the three years, nearly 25,000 cases received a CCO from Victorian adult courts, with the Magistrates’ Court dealing with over 95% of these cases. A CCO was used as a principal sentence in 16.0% of cases sentenced in the higher courts and 8.0% of cases sentenced in the Magistrates’ Court. The report has also examined changes in the use of CCOs, particularly in the period July 2013 to December 2014 compared with the previous 18 months. Over the three-year period, the use of CCOs increased. Between Period 1 (January 2012 to June 2013) and Period 2 (July 2013 to December 2014), the number of CCOs imposed in the higher courts increased by 30.8%, while the number imposed in the Magistrates’ Court increased by 17.4%. The rise in the use of CCOs is likely due to a number of factors. One factor is that courts increasingly used CCOs in place of suspended sentences. Legislation from September 2014 explicitly encourage courts to adopt such a practice. Another factor is that courts increasingly combined CCOs with imprisonment sentences. This practice is encouraged by the September 2014 legislative change increasing the maximum imprisonment term with which a CCO may be combined from three months to two years. While the use of CCOs increased over the three-year period, there was no change in the typical duration (as measured by the median) attached to CCOs. As in the previous 18 months, the median duration between July 2013 and December 2014 was 24 months in the higher courts and 12 months in the Magistrates’ Court. The choice of conditions attached to CCOs changed in the Magistrates’ While the conditions of unpaid community work and assessment and treatment remained steady, supervision declined from 50.9% of cases to 31.7%. There continued to be very infrequent use of conditions that did not exist for the community-based order, such as alcohol exclusion and curfews.