Mr Heaton, aged 35, was studying to be a paramedic. In August 2025 a disgruntled Mr Heaton damaged the vehicle belonging to the wife of man he was having a dispute with. He also threw a brick threw their house window causing damage. On 22 September 2026 he was found guilty of ‘two charges of property damage … – the maximum penalty for each charge is 10 years’ imprisonment’. On 23 September he came before Her Honour Judge Harber of the County Court of Victoria for sentence (Director of Public Prosecutions v Heaton [2026] VCC 1575). Mr Heaton represented himself. When making submissions as to the appropriate penalty ([20]-[21]):
Ms McMaster appearing for the prosecution submitted that I should impose a community correction order with conviction to properly reflect the relevant sentencing considerations and the value of the damage caused.
[Mr Heaton] … submitted that I should not impose a conviction as to do so would render you unable to continue to study to be a paramedic.
The order of the court was
… on Charge 1, damaging property, and Charge 2, damaging property, you are sentenced to be released on a community corrections order, without conviction, for a period of 12 months. You are to complete 100 hours of unpaid community work over that time.
It is the submission by Mr Heaton, and the effect of a conviction, or not, that I want to comment on.
Generally speaking, being able to study for a degree is a separate issue from whether one will be able to practice the relevant profession. For example, anyone can do a law degree even if their past criminal record means there is no chance that they will be admitted as a legal practitioner. Universities offer the education; it is up to the professions to determine whether or not someone will be allowed to practice the profession for which they have studied. The health professions are, however, different as students must undertake clinical placements and if they are not a fit and proper person for admission to the profession, they should not be in a position where they can deal with vulnerable persons.
The Health Practitioner Regulation National Law requires AHPRA, in cooperation with the relevant Boards to keep a register of students (s 25(g); see also s 89). The National Boards are also required to establish a criminal history standard to deal with matters to be considered when deciding whether a practitioner, or student’s, criminal history is ‘relevant to the practice of the profession’ (s 38(1)(b)).
Section 130 says (emphasis added):
A registered health practitioner or student must, within 7 days after becoming aware that a relevant event has occurred in relation to the practitioner or student, give the National Board established for the practitioner’s or student’s health profession written notice of the event.
The term ‘relevant event’ ‘in relation to a student’ includes the student being charged with ‘an offence punishable by 12 months imprisonment or more’ or the student ‘is convicted of or is the subject of a finding of guilt for … an offence punishable by imprisonment’ (s 130).
We do not know if Mr Heaton reported being charged with the relevant offences but we do know that s 130 means he was required to report those offences within 7 days. Mr Heaton was found guilty by the jury so he was ‘subject … [to] a finding of guilty’ even though he was not convicted. It follows that he is also required to report that outcome to the Board.
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) issued a revised Criminal History Registration Standard effective on 15 July 2026. This standard is said to apply to all the registered health professions. The definition of ‘criminal history’ is (emphasis added):
… every plea of guilty or finding of guilt by a court of the person for an offence, in a participating jurisdiction or elsewhere, and whether before or after the commencement of this Law and whether or not a conviction is recorded for the offence.
The Board will have to consider whether this event impacts upon Mr Heaton’s suitability to practice as a paramedic. The result is not automatic. The Board will consider
1. The nature of the offence or alleged offence and its relevance to health practice…
2. The gravity or seriousness of the offence or alleged offence…
… Serious offending… may impact on registration regardless of whether the nature of the offending is relevant to health practice…
3. The period of time since the health practitioner committed, or allegedly committed, the offence…
[The further back in time, the less relevant, but of course for Mr Heaton, these offences are very recent.]
4. Whether a finding of guilt or a conviction was recorded for the offence …
[As we know, in this case there was a community corrections order, but no formal conviction was recorded.]
5. The sentence imposed for the offence…
6. The age of the health practitioner at the time the health practitioner committed … the offence…
[An offence committed when very young may be seen in a different light to an offence by a more mature person. As noted Mr Heaton is 35.]
7. Whether or not the conduct that constituted the offence or to which the charge relates has been decriminalised since the health practitioner committed … the offence…
[Clearly not relevant here.]
8. The health practitioner’s behaviour since they committed … the offence…
9. The likelihood of future threat to a patient of the health practitioner…
10. Experiences of racism and inequity for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples…
11. Any information given by the health practitioner…
12. Any other matter that the Board considers relevant…
The registration standard continues
What if I have a criminal history?
If you have a criminal history, you must provide information to help the Board to decide whether you are a suitable person to be registered or to practise the profession.
Not all applicants with a criminal history are refused registration, and not all registered practitioners with a criminal history are required to stop practising.
There are a number of possible consequences in the National Law if you have a criminal history, including that
the Board can:
• refuse your application for registration or renewal of registration.
• impose conditions on your application or your registration which may, for example require you to undertake education, restrict your practice location or type or to take part in mentoring or a supervised practice arrangement.
• require you to undertake an examination or assessment.
• decide to take no action…
Depending on how the Board views this offending the Board may take ‘immediate action’ to suspend Mr Hasting’s registration as a student or to impose conditions on his registration (ss 155 and 156(1)(b)). If they don’t take immediate action they can apply the disciplinary processes set out in the Act and may impose conditions on the student’s registration (s 178).
Discussion
In short, Mr Heaton’s submission that a conviction ‘would render [him] … unable to continue to study to be a paramedic’ was wrong. The fact that the court enters a conviction or proceeds without that formal order is only one factor that the Board will consider.
A student, like Mr Heaton, is required to notify the Board both when they are charged (if the maximum penalty is more than 1 year imprisonment and in this case the maximum was 10 years imprisonment); and when they are found guilty. The Board will consider all the circumstances listed to determine whether the students offending will affect his or her eligibility for registration and/or continued registration as a student. He may or may not be allowed to continue his studies depending on whether the Board continues his student registration or imposes conditions on that registration.
This blog is a general discussion of legal principles only. It is not legal advice. Do not rely on the information here to make decisions regarding your legal position or to make decisions that affect your legal rights or responsibilities. For advice on your particular circumstances always consult an admitted legal practitioner in your state or territory.
