Regina v Popovic - [2001] NSWSC 1118

CITATION: Regina v Popovic [2001] NSWSC 1118

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70069/99

HEARING DATE(S): 13/6/00,14/6/00,15/6/00,19/6/00,20/6/00, 21/6/00, 22/6/00, 26/6/00, 27/6/00,28/6/00, 29/6/00,3/7/00,4/7/00,5/7/00,6/7/00,7/7/00,10/7/00,11/7/00,12/7/00,13/7/00,4/6/01,8/6/01,16/11/01

JUDGMENT DATE:
19 December 2001

PARTIES :

Regina v Zlatan Popovic

JUDGMENT OF: O'Keefe J

COUNSEL : Mr P V Conlon SC - Crown
Mr P Zahra SC/Mr M C Ramage QC - Prisoner

SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown
Peter Ash & Associates - Prisoner

CATCHWORDS: Manslaugther - Malicious woundings - Multiple convictions - Temporally related crimes - Totality - Provocation - Plea of guilty to manslaughter - Late contrition - Concurrency of sentences - Special circumstances - rehabilitation prospects

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900, s 35
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Regina v Storey (1997) 89 A Crim R 519
Regina v Isaacs (1997) 90 A Crim R 587 at 592
R v Troja NSWCCA 16 July 1991, unreported, per Kirby P
R v Hill (1980-1981) 3 A Crim R 397

DECISION: A fixed term of 3 years imprisonment on each count of malicious wounding; to be served concurrently. 10 years imprisonment on the count of manslaughter. Non parole period fixed at six years on this sentence.

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
WOLLONGONG
CRIMINAL DIVISION

O’KEEFE J

19 December 2001
No: 70069/99

REGINA v ZLATAN POPOVIC

Decision on Sentence

HIS HONOUR : INTRODUCTION

1 Zlatan Popovic (the prisoner), who was born on 16 February 1972, was arrested on 26 February 1999 and charged with having murdered Vedran Ravnjak (Mr Ravnjak, or the deceased) at Wollongong on 22 February 1999. Charges of maliciously wounding nine people at Wollongong on 22 February, 1999 were also then laid against him. The death and injuries referred to in the charges occurred when the prisoner discharged two shots from a double barrel shot gun in Kiera Street, Wollongong, at a time when a large number of shoppers and other people were in the vicinity.

2 The prisoner pleaded not guilty to the charges of murder and malicious wounding in Wollongong on 13 June 2000. After a hearing before a jury, which extended until 13 July 2000, the prisoner was convicted on each of the malicious wounding charges but the jury was unable to agree on a verdict in respect of the charge of murder.

3 On 19 March 2001 the prisoner stood trial for a second time on the charge of murder. Unfortunately, because of intervening circumstances quite beyond the control of the prisoner, the second trial had to be aborted. The jury was discharged on 29 March 2001.

4 After the discharge of the second jury there were discussions between the legal representatives of the prisoner and the Crown and for the first time since the arrest of the prisoner the Crown indicated that it would be prepared to entertain a plea of guilty to a charge of manslaughter. This decision was based on evidence given at the second trial in relation to threats from Mr Ravnjak directed at the prisoner, his mother and young son, extending…

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 Regina v Popovic

Details

AGLC: Regina v Popovic [2001] NSWSC 1118
Case: [2001] NSWSC 1118
Decision Date: 19 December 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Regina v Popovic, the defendant was convicted of multiple offences, including manslaughter, following a series of incidents involving his wife and a neighbour. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the trial judge imposed concurrent sentences for the manslaughter and malicious wounding charges. The defendant appealed against the sentences, arguing that they should have been concurrent in law rather than in effect, and that the trial judge had failed to adequately consider his prospects for rehabilitation.

The court was required to determine whether the sentences imposed were appropriate in light of the defendant's guilty plea and late contrition, as well as the totality principle and the need to balance punishment and deterrence with rehabilitation. The court also needed to consider whether the trial judge had given sufficient weight to the special circumstances of the case, including the defendant's prospects for rehabilitation and the impact of the crimes on the victims.

The court found that the trial judge had appropriately exercised his discretion in imposing concurrent sentences, taking into account the totality principle and the defendant's late contrition. The court rejected the argument that the sentences should have been concurrent in law rather than in effect, noting that this would have resulted in a lesser sentence for the manslaughter charge. The court also found that the trial judge had adequately considered the defendant's prospects for rehabilitation and the impact of the crimes on the victims, and had given appropriate weight to the special circumstances of the case. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

The court did not make any orders altering the sentences imposed by the trial judge.

Orders