Re Alajbegovic - [2014] QSC 6

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Re Alajbegovic [2014] QSC 6

PARTIES:

BANE ALAJBEGOVIC
(applicant)
V
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

468 of 2014

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Application for bail

ORIGINATING COURT:

Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

23 January 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

23 January 2014

JUDGE:

Philippides J

ORDER:

Bail granted

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – BAIL – BEFORE TRIAL – OTHER CASES – where the applicant is charged with contravening section 60A(1) of the Criminal Code – where applicant must show cause why detention in custody is not justified

Bail Act 1980 (Qld), s 16(1), s 16(2), s 16(3A)
Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld), s 60A(1)
Criminal Code (Criminal Organisations) Regulation 2013 (Qld)

Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment Act 2013 (Qld), s 4

R v Carew [2014] QSC 001

COUNSEL:

AJ Kimmins for the applicant

VA Loury for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Potts Lawyers for the applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

Philippides J:

Bail Application

This is an application by Bane Alajbegovic who seeks bail in relation to two charges that he, being a participant in a criminal organisation, was knowingly present in a public place with two or more others who were participants in a criminal organisation: see s 60A(1) Criminal Code.

The applicant has been on remand for the charges the subject of this application since his arrest on 4 January 2014. His next court appearance is a 17 February 2014 mention in the Southport Magistrates Court. The applicant’s trial has not yet been given a hearing date. It appears from the submissions made on behalf of the applicant that no trial can be expected before 7 May 2014.

Section 16 of the Bail Act

Section 16(1) of the Bail Act – unacceptable risk

Section 16(1) of the Bail Act provides that a court shall refuse to grant bail if the court is satisfied that there is an unacceptable risk that the defendant if released on bail would:

(a)commit further offences;
(b)interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice;
(c)fail to appear and surrender into custody;
(d)endanger the safety or welfare of victims or others; or
(e)pursuant to section 16(1)(b) – be at risk such that the detention in custody would be justified by the need for his own protection.

Section 16(3A)(a) of the Bail Act – applicant to show cause

There is no contest that because it is alleged that the applicant is a “participant in a criminal organisation” the applicant is in a show cause situation pursuant to s 16(3A)(a) of the Bail Act 1980. Accordingly, bail must be refused unless the applicant “shows cause why” his “detention in custody is not justified”.

Section 16(2) of the Bail Act provides that in assessing whether there is an unacceptable risk with respect to any event specified in s 16(1)(a), the court is to have regard to “all matters appearing to be relevant” and in particular to such of the considerations listed therein as appear to be relevant. For…

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 Re Alajbegovic

Details

AGLC: Re Alajbegovic [2014] QSC 6
Case: [2014] QSC 6
Decision Date: 23 January 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Alajbegovic, was before the court seeking bail in relation to charges under section 60A(1) of the Criminal Code, which pertains to possessing a firearm without a valid licence. The court's task was to determine if Alajbegovic had provided sufficient cause to justify why he should not remain in custody pending trial.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had demonstrated adequate grounds to warrant the granting of bail. This involved assessing the strength of the prosecution's case, the likelihood of the applicant attending court if released on bail, the risk of reoffending, and the public interest in the applicant remaining in custody. Additionally, the court had to consider the principles surrounding bail as established in relevant case law and statutory provisions.

The court examined the evidence presented and concluded that Alajbegovic had shown cause why detention in custody was not justified. Factors such as the applicant's ties to the community, employment, and support from family and friends were weighed alongside the potential severity of the offence. The court determined that these factors sufficiently mitigated the risks associated with releasing the applicant on bail. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to certain conditions, including regular reporting to authorities and restrictions on firearm-related activities.

The orders made by the court included granting bail to the applicant, subject to conditions that included regular check-ins with a bail supervisor, a curfew, and restrictions on accessing firearms or ammunition. These conditions were designed to ensure that Alajbegovic would comply with the terms of his bail and to mitigate any potential risk to the community.

Orders

Orders of the court

Bail granted

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.

CITATION:	Re Alajbegovic [2014] QSC 6
PARTIES:	BANE ALAJBEGOVIC (applicant) V DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	468 of 2014
DIVISION:	Trial
PROCEEDING:	Application for bail
ORIGINATING COURT:	Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	23 January 2014
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	23 January 2014
JUDGE:	Philippides J
ORDER:	Bail granted
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – BAIL – BEFORE TRIAL – OTHER CASES – where the applicant is charged with contravening section 60A(1) of the Criminal Code – where applicant must show cause why detention in custody is not justified Bail Act 1980 (Qld), s 16(1), s 16(2), s 16(3A) Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld), s 60A(1) Criminal Code (Criminal Organisations) Regulation 2013 (Qld) Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment Act 2013 (Qld), s 4 R v Carew [2014] QSC 001
COUNSEL:	AJ Kimmins for the applicant VA Loury for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Potts Lawyers for the applicant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent