Legal Research
Cases
R v Fesus (No. 9)

R v Fesus (No. 9)

Case [2018] NSWSC 176 23 February 2018

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Fesus (No. 9) [2018] NSWSC 176
Hearing dates: 15 December 2017, 6 February 2018,16 February 2018
Date of orders: 23 February 2018
Decision date: 23 February 2018
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Johnson J
Decision:
The Offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 22 years with a non-parole period of 16 years and six months to date from 25 October 2016.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence following trial - murder - Offender found guilty of murder of his 18-year old wife in 1997 at Mt Warrigal - murder by choking - Offender then buried body in shallow grave near Seven Mile Beach - body located a month later - domestic violence murder - absence of contrition or remorse - relevance of Offender’s recent health issues - approach to sentencing for murder committed in 1997
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999
Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Crimes Act 1900
Cases Cited:
Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150
Director of Public Prosecutions v Darcy-Shillingworth [2017] NSWCCA 224
Gonzales v R (2007) 178 A Crim R 232; [2007] NSWCCA 321
Katsis v R [2018] NSWCCA 9
Keir v R [2007] NSWCCA 149
Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292
Obeid v R (2017) 350 ALR 103; [2017] NSWCCA 221
Power v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 623; [1974] HCA 26
R v Achurch (2011) 216 A Crim R 152; [2011] NSWCCA 186
R v Chetcuti (Court of Criminal Appeal, 17 December 1993, unreported)
R v Everett (Court of Criminal Appeal, 13 December 1995, BC9500218)
R v Fesus [2014] NSWSC 770
R v Fesus (No. 8) [2017] NSWSC 1423
R v Hamid (2006) 164 A Crim R 179; [2006] NSWCCA 302
R v Herring (Badgery-Parker J, 4 December 1995, unreported)
R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374
R v Keir [2003] NSWSC 140
R v MJR (2002) 54 NSWLR 368; [2002] NSWCCA 129
R v Moon (2000) 117 A Crim R 497; [2000] NSWCCA 534
R v Nixon (Court of Criminal Appeal, 31 October 1995, BC9501636)
R v Obeid (No. 12) [2016] NSWSC 1815
R v Toki [2003] NSWCCA 125
R v Whitmore [1999] NSWCCA 75
R v Wilkinson (No. 5) [2009] NSWSC 43
RLS v R [2012] NSWCCA 236
The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54
Texts Cited: ---
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Steve Frank Fesus (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr G Smith SC (Crown)
Mr K Chapple SC (Offender)
Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Nyman Gibson Miralis (Offender)

File Number(s): 2013/207336
Publication restriction: ---

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

JOHNSON J: On 7 August 2017, the Offender, Steve Frank Fesus, was arraigned before a jury upon a charge that he, on 11 August 1997, at Mt Warrigal in the State of New South Wales did murder his wife, Jodie Melissa Fesus (“Jodie”). A plea…

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 R v Fesus (No. 9)

Details

AGLC: R v Fesus (No. 9) [2018] NSWSC 176
Case: [2018] NSWSC 176
Decision Date: 23 February 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Fesus involved the sentencing of the offender, who was found guilty of the murder of his 18-year-old wife in 1997. The court had to determine the appropriate sentence following the offender's conviction for this heinous crime, which involved choking the victim and burying her body in a shallow grave near Seven Mile Beach. The body was discovered a month after the murder occurred. The offender was convicted of a domestic violence murder and showed no contrition or remorse for his actions. The court also had to consider the offender's recent health issues and their relevance to the sentencing process.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was the appropriate sentence for the offender, who had been convicted of a brutal murder committed in 1997. The court needed to balance the gravity of the crime, the absence of contrition or remorse, and the offender's health issues in determining the appropriate punishment. The court also had to consider the principles of justice and deterrence in its sentencing decision.

The court concluded that the murder was a particularly heinous and brutal act, committed in the context of domestic violence. The offender showed no contrition or remorse for his actions, which further underscored the gravity of the crime. The court also took into account the offender's recent health issues, which had impacted his ability to work and provide for his family. However, these factors were not considered sufficient to warrant a reduction in the severity of the sentence. The court ultimately determined that the appropriate sentence for the offender was life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 25 years. This decision was based on the principles of justice, deterrence, and the need to protect the community from the offender's potential to reoffend.

Orders