Legal Research
Cases
Rokovada v The King

Rokovada v The King

Case [2025] NSWCCA 64 5 May 2025

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Rokovada v R [2025] NSWCCA 64
Hearing dates: 14 March 2025
Decision date: 05 May 2025
Before: Adamson JA at [1]
Hamill J at [47]
Ierace J at [64]
Decision:
(1) Grant leave to appeal.
(2) Dismiss the appeal.

Catchwords:
SENTENCING — appeals — appeal against sentence — offence of having sexual intercourse without consent contrary to s 61I of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) — plea of guilty – whether sentencing judge erred in providing a 10% discount as opposed to a 25% discount to reflect the applicant’s plea of guilty — Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 25D — leave granted — appeal dismissed

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61I
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 22, 25A, 25B, 25C, 25D, 25E, 25F, Pt 3 Div 1A, 33
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 55, 66, 70, 75, 77, 97
Justice Legislation Amendment (Committals and Guilty Pleas) Act 2017 (NSW)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 42.14, 42.15

Cases Cited:
Abbas Hijazi v Director of Public Prosecutions [2022] NSWSC 1218
Black v R (2022) 107 NSWLR 225; [2022] NSWCCA 17
Borri v R [2023] NSWCCA 166
Camilleri v R [2023] NSWCCA 106; (2023) 308 A Crim R 52
Carly Anne Coles v Director of Public Prosecutions [2022] NSWSC 960
Green v R [2022] NSWCCA 230
Ke v R [2021] NSWCCA 177
R v Cardoso [2003] NSWCCA 15; (2003) 137 A Crim R 535
R v Honeysett (No 2) (Sentence) [2023] NSWSC 103
R v Rifai [2022] NSWDC 74
R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309
SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2017) 262 CLR 362; [2017] HCA 34
Tuxford v Director of Public Prosecutions [2023] NSWSC 1300

Texts Cited:
Justice Legislation Amendment (Committals and Guilty Pleas) Bill 2017 (NSW)
New South Wales Legislative Assembly, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), 11 October 2017

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Sairusi Rokovada (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
I McLachlan (Applicant)
A Isaacs (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2023/85899
Publication restriction: Publication of names and any information or material that may lead to the identification of the complainant is prohibited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 578A
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

21 October 2024

Before:

Hanley SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2023/85899

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

Sairusi Rokovada (the applicant) was arrested on 15 March 2023 and charged with several sexual offences arising from a single incident in March 2022.

On 13 November 2023, the Crown made an initial plea offer. On 22 February 2024, the applicant made a counter offer to plead guilty to one count of sexual intercourse without consent on a specified factual basis that the complainant consented to all sexual activity except the act of ejaculation.…

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 Rokovada v The King

Details

AGLC: Rokovada v The King [2025] NSWCCA 64
Case: [2025] NSWCCA 64
Decision Date: 05 May 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Rokovada v The King, the appellant, Rokovada, appealed against his sentence following a guilty plea to a charge of having sexual intercourse without consent, a contravention of section 61I of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The primary issue before the court was whether the sentencing judge erred in the discount applied for the plea of guilty, specifically whether the discount should have been 25% instead of 10%. The appellant argued that the judge did not properly consider the principles set out in section 25D of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), which pertains to the discount for a plea of guilty.

The court examined the sentencing remarks and the application of the relevant statutory provisions. It considered whether the judge appropriately assessed the mitigating effect of the plea of guilty and whether the discount reflected the statutory requirements. The court concluded that the sentencing judge did not err in applying the 10% discount, as the remarks demonstrated a proper consideration of the principles and the specific circumstances of the case. The judge's assessment was deemed to be within the range of acceptable outcomes under the statute, and the discount applied was found to be appropriate.

Given the careful consideration of the statutory provisions and the sentencing remarks, the court dismissed the appeal. The sentencing judge's application of the discount for the plea of guilty was found to be correct, and thus, the sentence was upheld. The appeal was dismissed without further orders.

Orders