Billy Trajanovski v The Queen

The appellant, Billy Trajanovski, sought leave to appeal his sentence and that of his co-offender, MK, after both were convicted of a series of serious criminal offences including theft, handling stolen goods, and aggravated burglary. The trial judge sentenced BT to seven years and six months' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of five years, and MK to six years and three months' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of four years. The issues before the court were whether the sentences were manifestly excessive, whether the trial judge doubly punished BT, whether the trial judge erred in relying on BT’s uncharged acts as aggravating factors, and whether the trial judge failed to have regard to parity in sentencing MK. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the trial judge mischaracterised MK’s culpability by imputing knowledge of a firearm possessed by BT.

The court found that the sentences were within the appropriate range and that there was no double punishment of BT. The uncharged acts of BT did not separately warrant additional punishment as the trial judge did not suggest that BT was being punished for these uncharged acts. The trial judge did not err in considering BT’s uncharged acts as aggravating factors since they contributed to the overall culpability of BT. However, the court found that the trial judge should not have considered the presence of a gun as an aggravating factor for MK unless satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that MK was aware of the firearm. Despite this error, the court determined that no different sentence should be imposed on MK and dismissed the appeal concerning MK.

Ultimately, leave to appeal concerning BT was refused, while leave to appeal concerning MK was granted. However, the appeal was dismissed because the error in sentencing did not warrant a different outcome. The court held that the sentences were appropriate and did not manifest any significant judicial error.