R v Kaplantzi - [2020] NSWDC 889

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Kaplantzi [2020] NSWDC 889
Hearing dates: 20 November 2020; 26 November 2020
Decision date: 26 November 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Aggregate sentence of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.

Catchwords:
CRIMES - Fire firearm at dwelling-house with disregard for safety - use unauthorised pistol
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — early guilty plea- immediate admissions - nature of pistol “BB gun” – minor injuries caused - BB guns are not toys- grievance – taking law into own hands - breach of community correction orders – remorse - youth and immaturity – need for supervision and guidance - dangers of associations made in custody - significant finding of special circumstances.

Legislation Cited:
Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Firearms Act 1996

Cases Cited:
Attorney General’s Application No. 1; (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56
Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56
DPP v De Le Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
DPP v De Le Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59
Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610
R v Loveridge [2014] NSWCCA 120

Texts Cited:
Does Imprisonment Deter? A Review of the Evidence, Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council, April 2011

Category: Sentence
Parties: Matthew Kaplantzi (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr B Galloway, Galloways Solicitors (for the offender)
Ms N Olender (for the Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2019/00360491

Judgment

In February 2019 Matthew Kaplantzi was sentenced to Community Correction Orders for offences pursuant to the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007. They relate to two victims with whom he had previously been in relationships with. He was placed under supervision and it appears while that supervision continued made some progress. At the time he was living with his father in Nowra, helping in his father’s dog breeding business and avoiding his associates in the Wollongong area. When the supervision finished he left his father’s home and began to live in the Wollongong area. He started hanging out with people who, like himself, used and abused illicit drugs. He was not working and he was leading a relatively aimless existence.
On 15 November 2019 Kaplantzi drove his BMW sedan to an address in Windang, in southern Wollongong where a ‘transaction’ took place. The offender then went home and obtained what is described as a ‘BB’ or ball bearing gun and returned to the premises. He drove slowly past the residence with the window of his vehicle down. He took the gun and held it through the open window. At that time three young men were outside the premises near a vehicle belonging to one of the residents. The offender fired more than ten shots from the gun. One man was struck in the forearm. The pellet caused a small puncture wound.…

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 Kaplantzi

Details

AGLC: R v Kaplantzi [2020] NSWDC 889
Case: [2020] NSWDC 889
Decision Date: 26 November 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Kaplantzi, was convicted of several serious charges including firing a firearm at a dwelling-house with disregard for safety and using an unauthorised pistol. The court had to determine the appropriate sentence for these serious offences, taking into account a range of mitigating and aggravating factors.

The legal issues before the court included the significance of the early guilty plea and immediate admissions by the appellant, the nature of the weapon used which was a BB gun, the injuries caused, and the appellant's background and circumstances. The court also had to consider the appellant's grievance and the breach of community correction orders, alongside the need for remorse, youth, immaturity, the need for supervision and guidance, and the dangers posed by the associations made in custody.

In delivering the judgment, the court recognised the appellant’s early guilty plea and immediate admissions as mitigating factors. However, it also emphasised the seriousness of firing a BB gun at a dwelling, which, while not a lethal weapon, is not a toy and can cause harm. The court further noted the appellant's grievance and the breach of community correction orders as aggravating factors. Despite this, the court found special circumstances due to the appellant’s youth, immaturity, and the need for supervision and guidance. The court also considered the risks posed by the appellant's associations made in custody. Ultimately, the court imposed an aggregate sentence of 3 years and 4 months, with a non-parole period of 1 year and 8 months.

The final orders of the court were that the appellant was to serve an aggregate sentence of 3 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year and 8 months. This sentence reflected the court's balanced consideration of all the relevant factors, including the gravity of the offences and the appellant's personal circumstances.

Orders

Orders of the court

Aggregate sentence of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Kaplantzi [2020] NSWDC 889
Hearing dates:	20 November 2020; 26 November 2020
Decision date:	26 November 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Aggregate sentence of 3 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.
Catchwords:	CRIMES - Fire firearm at dwelling-house with disregard for safety - use unauthorised pistol SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — early guilty plea- immediate admissions - nature of pistol “BB gun” – minor injuries caused - BB guns are not toys- grievance – taking law into own hands - breach of community correction orders – remorse - youth and immaturity – need for supervision and guidance - dangers of associations made in custody - significant finding of special circumstances.
Legislation Cited:	Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Firearms Act 1996
Cases Cited:	Attorney General’s Application No. 1; (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56 Clarke-Jeffries v R [2019] NSWCCA 56 DPP v De Le Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 DPP v De Le Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610 R v Loveridge [2014] NSWCCA 120
Texts Cited:	Does Imprisonment Deter? A Review of the Evidence, Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council, April 2011
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Matthew Kaplantzi (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Solicitors: Mr B Galloway, Galloways Solicitors (for the offender) Ms N Olender (for the Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2019/00360491