R v Voukelatos

Case [2023] NSWDC 304


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Voukelatos [2023] NSWDC 304
Hearing dates: 28 July 2023 & 15 August 2023
Date of orders: 18 August 2023
Decision date: 18 August 2023
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:

Specify an aggregate term of imprisonment of 6 years 3 months with a non-parole period of 3 years 9 months

Catchwords:

CRIME — Drug offences — Supply prohibited drug — Commercial quantity

CRIME — Firearms offences — Use/Possess prohibited pistol/firearm

SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Aggregate sentences

SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Form 1 offences

SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Deterrence

SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences

SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Purposes of sentencing

SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Instinctive synthesis

SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Expert reports

SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Reasons for sentence

Legislation Cited:

Confiscation of Proceeds of Crimes Act 1989

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Customs Act 1901

Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985

Firearms Act 1996

Cases Cited:

Attorney General’s Application Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No. 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518

Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37

Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194

Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144

Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25

Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39

R v Osenkowski (1982) 5 A Crim R 394

R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353

R v Valentini (1989) 46 A Crim R 23

Regina v Henry et Al [1999] NSWCCA 111

Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247

The Queen v Olbrich [1999] HCA 54

Veen v The Queen (No. 2) (1987-1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14

Texts Cited:

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Ed.

Category:Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Eftimos Truthe Miles Voukelatos (Offender)
Representation:

Michal Solecki (Solicitor for the ODPP)
William Barber (Counsel for the Offender)

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Richard Cummins Solicitors (Offender)
File Number(s): 2022/00123891

JUDGEMENT ON SENTENCE

Introduction

  1. Eftimos Truthe Miles Voukelatos appears for sentence charged with two offences:

Sequence Six

Between 23 December 2021 and 28 April 2022, in Roselands in the State of New South Wales, did supply an amount of a prohibited drug, namely cocaine, being an amount which was not less that the commercial quantity applicable to the prohibited drug.

S 25(2) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Law part code 3183

Sequence 18

On 29 April 2022, at Roselands in the State of New South Wales, did possess a pistol, namely, a gel ball air gun, not being authorised to do so by a licence or permit.

S 7(1) Firearms Act 1996 Law part code 53108

  1. The offender acknowledged his pleas of guilty in the Local Court and adhered to them in this court.

Additional Offences

  1. When deciding upon the sentence for the offence of supply prohibited drug I am…

Continue reading R v Voukelatos

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Voukelatos [2023] NSWDC 304
Case
[2023] NSWDC 304
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Voukelatos was heard in a court where the defendant was charged with multiple drug and firearms offences. The defendant was found guilty of supplying a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug and possessing a prohibited pistol. The matter was brought before the court to determine the appropriate sentence considering the nature and circumstances of the offences.

The court had to address several legal issues, including how to determine the appropriate aggregate sentence for multiple offences, the consideration of deterrence in sentencing, and the role of expert reports in understanding the defendant's circumstances. The court also needed to consider the purposes of sentencing, particularly in relation to deterrence and the defendant's potential for rehabilitation.

In delivering the sentence, the court emphasised the seriousness of the offences, noting the significant quantities of drugs involved and the illegal possession of a firearm. The court applied the principle of instinctive synthesis, weighing all relevant factors to arrive at a just outcome. Expert reports were considered to provide insights into the defendant's background and potential for rehabilitation. The court concluded that an aggregate term of imprisonment was necessary to adequately reflect the gravity of the offences, while also considering the potential for the defendant to be rehabilitated. The final sentence was an aggregate term of imprisonment of six years and three months, with a non-parole period of three years and nine months.

Orders

Orders of the court

Specify an aggregate term of imprisonment of 6 years 3 months with a non-parole period of 3 years 9 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.