Dragovic v The King

Dragovic v The King involved an appellant who was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for various criminal offences, including assault, criminal damage, and breaches of a family violence intervention order. The appellant had been on bail when he physically assaulted his intimate partner, damaged her property, and then continued to contravene a family violence intervention order by contacting her from prison. The appellant pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to a total of two years imprisonment with a non-parole period of one year. The appeal was against the sentence imposed by the County Court.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the aggregate sentence and the cumulation of the sentences were manifestly excessive. The appellant argued that the sentences imposed were too harsh, given his acceptance of guilt and the fact that he had no prior criminal history. The Crown submitted that the sentences were appropriate given the severity and frequency of the offences committed, particularly in light of the appellant’s persistent contravention of a family violence intervention order.

The Court of Appeal considered the principles of sentencing outlined in Clarkson v The Queen and the relevant statutory provisions under the Crimes Act 1958 and the Family Violence Protection Act 2008. The court noted that the appellant had a serious history of offending against his intimate partner and had demonstrated a lack of remorse by continuing to contravene the family violence intervention order. The Court found that the sentences were neither manifestly excessive nor disproportionate to the offending. The Court also noted that the appellant had not raised any argument in relation to the non-parole period, and therefore, no order was made in relation to that aspect of the sentence. Leave to appeal was refused.

The court’s final orders were that the appeal against sentence be dismissed, and leave to appeal be refused.