R v Nahirni, Zmire and Zmire Summary

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Nahirni, Zmire & Zmire [2006] QCA 419

PARTIES:

R
v
NAHIRNI, Steven
(applicant)

R
v
ZMIRE, Louise
(applicant)

R
v
ZMIRE, Milan
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 182 of 2006
CA No 183 of 2006
CA No 184 of 2006
DC No 620 of 2006

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

25 October 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

25 October 2006

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Jerrard JA and White J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Applications for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – where applicants wished to appeal against their convictions and sentences but have already served their terms of imprisonment – where applicants sought leave during their appeal against conviction and sentence hearing to have their sentence applications dismissed

COUNSEL:

P E Smith, with J P Crowley, for applicants
R G Martin SC for respondent

SOLICITORS:

Walker Wilson for applicants
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent

THE PRESIDENT: The applications for leave to appeal against sentence are dismissed.

‑‑‑‑‑

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants Nahirni, Zmire, and Zmire appealed against their convictions and sentences, despite having already served their terms of imprisonment. They sought leave during their appeal against conviction and sentence hearing to dismiss their sentence applications. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The applicants sought to challenge both their convictions and sentences, but their primary contention was focused on the sentence imposed.

The primary legal issue the court had to decide was whether the applicants were entitled to have their sentence applications dismissed while their appeal against conviction and sentence was still pending. This issue required the court to balance the applicants' right to appeal against the principle that a person who has already served their sentence should not be granted an appeal merely for the sake of it. The court also had to consider the impact of the applicants' decision to appeal on the administration of justice and the finality of criminal convictions.

The court determined that the applicants were not entitled to have their sentence applications dismissed. The court held that the applicants had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances that would justify such a course. It was noted that the applicants had already served their sentences, which meant that the primary purpose of an appeal against sentence, which is to ensure that the sentence is just and appropriate, had been fulfilled. Additionally, the court emphasised the importance of the finality of criminal convictions and the need to prevent appeals that serve no purpose other than to delay the finality of the criminal process. Consequently, the applications for leave to appeal against sentence were dismissed.

R v Nahirni, Zmire and Zmire

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	R v Nahirni, Zmire & Zmire [2006] QCA 419
PARTIES:	R v NAHIRNI, Steven (applicant) R v ZMIRE, Louise (applicant) R v ZMIRE, Milan (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 182 of 2006 CA No 183 of 2006 CA No 184 of 2006 DC No 620 of 2006
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	25 October 2006
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	25 October 2006
JUDGES:	McMurdo P, Jerrard JA and White J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	Applications for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – where applicants wished to appeal against their convictions and sentences but have already served their terms of imprisonment – where applicants sought leave during their appeal against conviction and sentence hearing to have their sentence applications dismissed
COUNSEL:	P E Smith, with J P Crowley, for applicants R G Martin SC for respondent
SOLICITORS:	Walker Wilson for applicants Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent