Regina v Angelo Zepidis

Angelo Zepidis was charged with multiple firearms offences including possessing unauthorised firearms and possessing a shortened firearm. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Zepidis claimed he was under duress when he possessed the firearms, however this defence was rejected by the Court. The primary legal issues in the case were whether the defendant was guilty of possessing unauthorised firearms and possessing a shortened firearm, and if so, what the appropriate sentence should be.

The Court had to determine whether Zepidis had genuinely believed he was under duress at the time he possessed the firearms, and if so, whether this constituted a valid defence. The Court found that the defence of duress was not applicable in this case, as Zepidis had not demonstrated that he had a reasonable belief that he was under immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm at the time he possessed the firearms. The Court also considered the severity of the offences and Zepidis' criminal history in determining the appropriate sentence.

The Court found Zepidis guilty of the four offences and imposed an aggregate sentence of 4 ½ years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 ½ years. The Court considered the indicative sentences for each offence and the overall sentence for all offences, taking into account the breach of an Intervention Order. The sentence imposed provides a ratio of 55%. The Court also considered the overall sentence, which provides a ratio of 61%.

The final orders of the Court were that Zepidis is convicted of the four offences, an aggregate sentence is imposed, and the non-parole period and term of the sentence are set out in the orders. The Court's decision provides clarity on the applicability of the defence of duress in firearms offences and the appropriate sentence for such offences in Victoria.