Milosevic v The the King - [2022] NZCA 479

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA99/2021
CA79/2021
CA122/2021
CA153/2021
CA400/2021
CA114/2021
CA119/2021
[2022] NZCA 479

BETWEEN	FRANK AMADEUS MILOSEVIC SLOBODAN RAHOROI MILOSEVIC STARLIGHT WHETUMARAMA MANUEL LAWRENCE TE KIRA KEITH PRYOR IRENE RAKI RAIHA TAWERA Appellants
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	30 and 31 March 2022
Court:	Clifford, Lang and Mallon JJ
Counsel:	W T Nabney for Frank Amadeus Milosevic G A Walsh for Slobodan Rahoroi Milosevic M J James for Starlight Whetumarama Manuel A M Simperingham and D A Berry for Lawrence Te Kira C D Bean and A Bean for Keith Pryor R E Webby for Irene Raki N M Dutch for Raiha Tawera F R J Sinclair, Z A Fuhr and T R Simpson for Respondent
Judgment:	12 October 2022 at 3.00 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AMr F Milosevic and Mr S Milosevic’s appeals against conviction are allowed in part. Their convictions for money laundering are quashed. Their appeals against conviction are otherwise dismissed.
B      Mr F Milosevic’s appeal against sentence is allowed in part. We substitute his sentence of 17 years and six months’ imprisonment with a 50 per cent MPI with one of 16 years and six months’ imprisonment with a 50 per cent MPI.
CMr S Milosevic’s appeal against sentence is allowed in part. We substitute his sentence of 15 years and nine months’ imprisonment with a 50 per cent MPI with one of 14 years and nine months’ imprisonment with a 50 per cent MPI.
D      Ms Raki and Ms Tawera’s appeals against conviction and sentence are allowed. Their convictions for money laundering are quashed.
E      Mr Manuel’s appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
F      Mr Pryor’s application for an extension of time to appeal is granted, but his appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
G     Mr Te Kira’s appeal against sentence is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Clifford J)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction	[1]
Background	[2]
Offending	[2]
Convictions and sentences	[4]
Conviction appeals	[6]
The trial	[8]
Conviction appeals	[12]
Drug offending	[16]
Inadequate computer access — F Milosevic	[16]
The glossary of terms	[33]
Mr Boyes’ evidence — Mr S Milosevic	[38]
The F Milosevic “cross-examination” ruling	[42]
The Judge’s interventions	[44]
F Milosevic	[45]
Detectives Scott, Waugh and Sowter	[70]
The Judge’s summing up	[75]
Money laundering	[92]
Overview	[92]
The severance decision	[96]
Interventions — cross-examination Ms Clay	[128]
The late amendment of the charge	[139]
The Judge’s summing up	[143]
Our assessment	[149]
Sentence appeals	[160]
Mr F Milosevic	[163]
Mr S Milosevic	[173]
Mr Pryor	[188]
Mr Te Kira	[192]
Mr Manuel	[199]
Result	[204]

Introduction

On 13 November 2020, following an eight-week jury trial, the appellants were convicted on a range of methamphetamine and cannabis offending, and associated money laundering, charges. They were sentenced by Judge Mabey KC in the District Court at Tauranga on 11 and 12 February 2021. These are appeals against conviction and sentence.[1]

Background

Offending

[1]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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Milosevic v The the King 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: [2022] NZCA 479
Decision Date: 12 October 2022 at 3.00 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard appeals from seven defendants convicted following a drug trafficking trial. The defendants were convicted of a variety of drug and money laundering charges, with sentences ranging from three years and four months to 17 years and six months’ imprisonment. The appellants raised numerous grounds of appeal, including that the trial judge had improperly interfered in the trial, had made errors in admitting evidence, and had given an unfair summing up. The Court found that while the judge had made some errors, the convictions were safe. The Court did, however, find that the convictions for money laundering were unsafe, and quashed those convictions. The Court also found that the sentences of two of the appellants were manifestly excessive and reduced them.

Orders