Regina v Christov [No 2] - [2006] NSWSC 1179

CITATION: Regina v Christov [No 2] [2006] NSWSC 1179

HEARING DATE(S): 28.08.06
30-31.08.06
4-5.09.06
08.09.06
11-12.09.06
14.09.06
22.09.06
27.10.06

JUDGMENT DATE :
17 November 2006

JURISDICTION: Common Law Division
Criminal List

JUDGMENT OF: Kirby J

DECISION: Taking account of the matters on the Form 1, sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 23 years commencing on 12 January 2004 and expiring on 11 January 2027. A non parole period of 17 years, commencing on 12 January 2004. The balance of the term will be 6 years. The first date eligible for release on parole is 11 January 2021.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal Practice & Procedure - murder - sentence - two Form 1 motor vehicle matters - standard non parole period 20 years - whether offence in mid range - reasons to moderate standard non parole - offender aged 54 years at time of offence.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: R v Christov [2006] NSWSC 972
R v Way (2004) 60 NSWLR 168
R v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575
MLP v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 271
Holyoak v Regina (1995) 82 A Crim R 502
R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76

PARTIES: Regina
Ivan Christov

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2005/116

COUNSEL: D Howard SC (Crown)
C Nash/D Kang (Acc)

SOLICITORS: T Hammond - DPP (Crown)
Ford Criminal Lawyers (Acc)

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

DAVID KIRBY J

Friday 17 November 2006

2005/116 REGINA v Ivan CHRISTOV [No 2]
JUDGMENT ON SENTENCE

1 KIRBY J: At about 1.00 am on 11 January 2004, the body of Lynette Phillips was found in the front bedroom of her home at Engadine. She had been strangled. Two ligatures had been tied tightly around her neck. Ambulance officers were unable to revive her. They ceased any attempt at resuscitation at 1.45 am.

2 Mr Christov was charged with her murder. On 28 August 2006, having been arraigned before me in respect of that charge, he pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty of manslaughter. It was said that he was substantially impaired by reason of an abnormality of mind. The Crown, however, refused to accept the plea of manslaughter. The matter proceeded on the charge of murder. Mr Christov, with the consent of the Crown, elected to be tried by a Judge sitting alone. Having heard the evidence, I gave judgment on 22 September 2006 (R v Christov [2006] NSWSC 972). I found Mr Christov guilty of the murder of Lynette Phillips.

3 When submissions on sentence were made on 27 October 2006, the Crown asked, with the consent of Mr Christov, to have two outstanding charges added to the matter for sentence on a Form 1. The matters were:

· first, that on 10/11 January 2004, Mr Christov stole a motor vehicle, the property of Lynette Phillips (s154AA(1) Crimes Act 1900);

·…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Regina v Christov [No 2] and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2006] NSWSC 1179
Decision Date: 17 November 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Regina v Christov [No 2], the appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 20 years. The case was heard by the High Court of Australia, which was called upon to review the sentence imposed by the lower courts. The appellant argued that the standard non-parole period of 20 years was too severe given his age at the time of the offence and the specific circumstances of the case.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed was appropriate, particularly in light of the appellant's age and the mitigating factors presented. The court was required to consider whether the sentence was within the range of penalties appropriate for the crime committed, and if there were any reasons to adjust the standard non-parole period.

The court found that the sentence was appropriate. It held that the offence was in the mid-range for murder cases, and that there were no compelling reasons to reduce the standard non-parole period. The court emphasised the gravity of the offence and the need to ensure that the sentence reflects the seriousness of the crime. The appellant's age was considered, but ultimately it was determined that this factor did not warrant a reduction in the sentence. The court concluded that the sentence imposed was just and appropriate, and did not need to be altered.

Orders