Manojlovic v R; R v Manojlovic [2020] NSWCCA 315

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Manojlovic v R; R v Manojlovic [2020] NSWCCA 315 Hearing dates: 4 September 2020; 25 September 2020 Decision date: 02 December 2020 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1], Button J at [160] N Adams J at [162] Decision: CONVICTION: (1) Leave to appeal against conviction is granted. (2) The appeal against conviction is dismissed. SENTENCE: (1) The appeal is allowed. (2) The sentence imposed on the respondent by Williams SC DCJ on 9 April 2020 is quashed. (3) In lieu thereof, the respondent is sentenced to an aggregate sentence pursuant to s 53A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) of imprisonment of 5 years, 6 months to commence on 10 February 2020 with a non-parole period of 3 years to expire on 9 February 2023. (4) Pursuant to s 53A(4) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) the indicative sentences are: Count 1: 20 months with a non-parole period of 12 months. Count 2: 2 years with a non-parole period of 15 months. Count 3: 2 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 22 months. Count 5: 3 years with a non-parole period of 2 years. Count 7: 3 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – conviction appeal – two counts of aggravated indecent assault, three counts of aggravated sexual intercourse without consent – circumstance of aggravation being "under authority" – conviction after trial by jury – victim school pupil – offender school teacher – whether verdicts of guilty were unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence – credit and reliability of victim challenged – whether it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that offender was guilty – leave to appeal against conviction granted – appeal against conviction dismissed – CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence - Crown appeal - assessment of objective seriousness - respondent's knowledge of lack of consent - knowledge rather than recklessness - characterisation of objective seriousness as "towards the low end of the range" - whether sentence manifestly inadequate Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – ss 61J(1), 61M(1), s 73(2), 578A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 5(1)(b) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) – s 294 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – s 44 Cases Cited: Antouny v R [2020] NSWCCA 203 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 CMB v Attorney General for New South Wales (2015) 256 CLR 346; [2015] HCA 9 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Burton [2020] NSWCCA 54 Everett v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 295; [1994] HCA 49 at 300 Gibson v Regina [2019] NSWCCA 221 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Griffiths v The Queen (1977) 137 CLR 293; [1977] HCA 44 Hampton v R (2014) 243 A Crim R 193; [2014] NSWCCA 131 Harkin v R [2020] NSWCCA 242 Hawi v R [2014] NSWCCA 83 Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 KSC v R [2012] NSWCCA 179 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Maughan v R [2020] NSWCCA 51 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606; [2002] HCA 53 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 Neto v R [2020] NSWCCA 128 Pell v The Queen (2020) 94 ALJR 394; [2020] HCA 12 R v Kitchener (1993) 29 NSWLR 696 R v Manojlovic [2020] NSWDC 221 R v Ralston [2020] ACTCA 47 R v Tolmie (1995) 37 NSWLR 660 Refaieh v R [2018] NSWCCA 72 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 Taitoko v R [2020] NSWCCA 43 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Alexander Manojlovic – Applicant/Respondent Regina – Respondent/Applicant Representation: Counsel: I Lloyd QC/ T Bicanic – Applicant/Respondent M Millward – Respondent/Applicant