R v Bortic [2021] NSWCCA 138

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Bortic [2021] NSWCCA 138 Hearing dates: 28 April 2021 Decision date: 30 June 2021 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]; Bellew J at [140]; Hidden AJ at [180] Decision: (1) The Crown appeal is allowed. (2) The orders made by his Honour Ellis DCJ on 7 October 2020 are quashed. (3) In lieu thereof, the following orders are made: (a) In relation to the s 166 Certificate, the respondent is disqualified from driving for 6 months. (b) In relation to the three indictment counts, the respondent is convicted and a global disqualification is imposed of 4 years. (c) The respondent is sentenced to an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for 8 years commencing 7 October 2020 and expiring on 6 October 2028 with a non-parole period of 4 years and 9 months commencing 7 October 2020 and expiring 6 July 2025. (d) In relation to Count 1 (Sequence 5) the indicative sentence is 6 years. (e) In relation to Count 2 (Sequence 6) the indicative sentence is 6 years. (f) In relation to Count 3 (ex officio) the indicative sentence is 9 months. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Crown sentence appeal – pleas of guilty to one count of dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm and two counts of aggravated dangerous driving causing death – three victims were passengers in respondent's vehicle, two of whom were killed as a result of his conduct – sentence of imprisonment for 6 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 9 months imposed – speed and alcohol – challenge by Crown to levels of accumulation and to total effective sentence – high level of moral culpability – error demonstrated – non-parole period and head sentence both manifestly inadequate – respondent re-sentenced. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW) Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Casey v R (2015) 71 MVR 191; [2015] NSWCCA 142 CMB v The Attorney General for New South Wales (2015) 256 CLR 346; [2015] HCA 9 Collier v R [2012] NSWCCA 213 Conte v R (2018) 86 MVR 239; [2018] NSWCCA 209 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Everett v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 295; [1994] HCA 49 FL v R [2020] NSWCCA 114 Goodbun v R [2020] NSWCCA 77 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 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 Khoury v R (2011) 209 A Crim R 509; [2011] NSWCCA 118 Lehn v R (2016) 78 MVR 353; (2016) 262 A Crim R 537; [2016] NSWCCA 255 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665; [1999] HCA 29 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Moodie v R (2020) 93 MVR 197; [2020] NSWCCA 160 Mulato v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 282 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Norouzi v R [2020] NSWCCA 237 Power v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 623; [1974] HCA 26 R v AB (2011) 59 MVR 356; [2011] NSWCCA 229 R v Blanco (1999) 106 A Crim R 303 R v Carter [2003] NSWCCA 243 R v Cramp [2004] NSWCCA 264 R v Elfar [2003] NSWCCA 358 R v Fahda [2013] NSWCCA 86 R v Fidow [2004] NSWCCA 172 R v Hill [2020] NSWCCA 197 R v Janceski [2005] NSWCCA 288; (2005) 44 MVR 328 R v Jurisic (1998) 45 NSWLR 209; (1998) 29 MVR 49; (1998) 101 A Crim R 259 R v Lulham (2016) 262 A Crim R 287; [2016] NSWCCA 287 R v McIntyre (1988) 8 MVR 371 R v Shashati (2018) 85 MVR 194; [2018] NSWCCA 167 R v Simpson (2001) 53 NSWLR 74; [2001] NSWCCA 534 R v Smith, Jarad (2016) 75 MVR 367; [2016] NSWCCA 75 R v Tuuta [2014] NSWCCA 40 R v Wright (2013) 63 MVR 250; (2013) 229 A Crim R 245; [2013] NSWCCA 82 Regina v Whyte (2002) 55 NSWLR 252; (2002) 37 MVR 1; [2002] NSWCCA 343 Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38 Thach v R [2018] NSWCCA 252 Wong v The Queen; Leung v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina – Applicant Crown Adam Anthony Bortic – Respondent Representation: Counsel: M A Kumar – Applicant Crown A Boe/D Beaufils – Respondent