R v Rajkovic

This case concerned an appeal against sentence brought by Robert Rajkovic, who had pleaded guilty to numerous offences including possessing firearms without a licence, failing to secure firearms and ammunition, unlawful possession of suspected stolen property, and possessing prohibited weapons. The District Court Judge had imposed a single sentence of imprisonment for four years and ten months, with a non-parole period of two years and nine months, for certain offences, and had later attempted to recall and vary this sentence under section 9A of the Sentencing Act.

The legal issues before the Court of Criminal Appeal included whether the sentencing judge had erred in recalling the sentence and imposing a new one, particularly in light of the judge's interpretation of new provisions concerning "serious firearm offences" and "serious firearm offenders" under the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA). The court was also required to consider the proper approach to fact-finding on sentence, including the burden and standard of proof for aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and the relevance of evidence provided by an offender after a guilty plea.

The court found that the sentencing judge had made an error in recalling the sentence. This error stemmed from the judge's misapplication of section 18A of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA) in imposing a single sentence, when the provisions regarding serious firearm offences meant that section 18A should not have applied to the possession of the sawn-off shotgun. The court also noted concerns regarding the drafting of the charges and the process by which the judge had elicited evidence from the appellant, referencing principles established in cases such as *R v Capaldo*, *Weininger v The Queen*, and *R v Kreutzer* regarding the factual matrix for sentencing.

The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted for re-sentencing before a different judge of the District Court. The court highlighted the importance of accurate drafting of charges and the careful application of sentencing legislation, particularly in light of complex statutory provisions.