R v Boskovic CA33/06

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the case of The Queen v Edin Bozz Boskovic was heard. The appellant, Boskovic, was convicted of sexual violation by rape in the High Court at Auckland, but acquitted of two charges of unlawful sexual connection. He was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment, with a four-year minimum non-parole period, and appealed both his conviction and sentence. The appeal against conviction was based on the trial judge's refusal to allow cross-examination of the officer in charge and the complainant regarding the acquittal of the co-accused and his alibi evidence. The appeal against sentence argued that the term of imprisonment was manifestly excessive, and the circumstances did not call for the imposition of any non-parole period.

The court found that the trial judge was correct in refusing the application to cross-examine the officer in charge and the complainant on the matters raised. The court found that the acquittal of the co-accused did not in itself bear directly on any issue in the trial and that the collateral evidence rule prevented the admission of such evidence. The court further found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive and that the trial judge had properly considered the relevant parameters before imposing the minimum non-parole period.

The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the appeal against sentence was also dismissed. The final orders of the court were that the appeal against conviction is dismissed and the appeal against sentence is dismissed.