Application for bail by Joseph Marijancevic - [2010] VSC 122

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 1471 of 2009

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)

and

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by JOSEPH MARIJANCEVIC

---

JUDGE:	LASRY J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATES OF HEARING:	25 March 2010, 8 April 2010
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	8 April 2010
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Application for bail by Joseph Marijancevic
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2010] VSC 122

---

BAIL – Application for bail – Exceptional circumstances – Unacceptable risk – Delay.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr S Gillespie-Jones	Applicant in Person
For the Respondent	Mr D Brown	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

This is an application for bail by Joseph Marijancevic (“the applicant”). Mr Marijancevic began the application by representing himself but at my suggestion subsequently made arrangements for Mr Gillespie-Jones of counsel to appear for him, as I understand it, on a pro bono basis. The Court is particularly grateful for Mr Gillespie‑Jones's willingness to represent the applicant in those circumstances.

The applicant is 60 years of age and is charged with offences in relation to two separate occasions.

The first group of offences: Operation “Hotrod”

First, on 25 June 2009, he was charged with a number of offences, including conspiring to traffick a large commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, being methylamphetamine, contrary to the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act. That offence is alleged to have been committed during the period between 4 July 2008 and 31 August 2008. As part of that group of offences, he is also charged that between 5 August 2008 and 31 August 2008, he possessed articles, materials and substances with intention to traffick in a drug of dependence. As I understand it, there are six co‑accused in relation to these matters. Mark Adams and Paul Glushak are in custody, while Nola Preece, Evangelos Karditsis and Caline Preece are on bail. Another person charged, Daniel Rjanancew, pleaded guilty to assisting Nola Preece and has been released on a 15 month suspended sentence.

As I have said, the applicant was charged in June of 2009. As Mr Gillespie‑Jones has pointed out, his co‑accused were charged in September 2008. Mr Gillespie‑Jones has relied on what he has described as some “animus” on the part of members of the Victorian police force towards Mr Marijancevic which is illustrated, among other things, by that delay in being charged. I express no conclusion on that issue.

In relation to this first group of offences, the applicant made an application for bail before Kaye J in this Court on 6 November 2009[1]. In that application, he raised five factors which he argued either individually or collectively constituted exceptional circumstances. They included that, whilst in custody, he was having difficulty preparing his case. Second, that if he remained in custody, he would lose his rented accommodation. Third, if he remained in custody, his mental health would deteriorate. Fourth, that on proper analysis, the Crown…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Application for bail by Joseph Marijancevic

Details

AGLC: Application for bail by Joseph Marijancevic [2010] VSC 122
Case: [2010] VSC 122
Decision Date: 8 April 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Joseph Marijancevic, the applicant sought bail from the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant should be granted bail given the alleged crime's seriousness and the potential risk to the community if released. The court had to consider the exceptional circumstances surrounding the case, which impacted the risk assessment and the potential for undue delay in the proceedings.

The court was tasked with determining whether the exceptional circumstances warranted bail despite the inherent risks. This involved weighing the seriousness of the alleged offences against the applicant's right to liberty, and assessing whether the risk to the community could be mitigated through bail conditions. Additionally, the court considered the impact of any delay on the applicant's right to a fair trial and the administration of justice.

After carefully evaluating the evidence and arguments presented, the court concluded that the risk to the community posed by the applicant's release was unacceptable. The severity of the alleged crimes and the potential for significant harm if the applicant were to reoffend outweighed the applicant's right to liberty. Furthermore, the court found that the exceptional circumstances did not sufficiently mitigate the risks to justify bail. Consequently, the application for bail was dismissed.

Orders