R v Cemitis, Andrew [No 1] [2010] NSWDC 158

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: R v Cemitis, Andrew [No 1] [2010] NSWDC 158

HEARING DATE(S): 17/12/2009 and 12/02/2010

JUDGMENT DATE: 8 March 2010

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Nicholson SC DCJ

DECISION: Application to vacate or withdraw pleas of Guilty refused.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal Law - Interlocutory application - application to vacate pleas of guilt (x3) - pleas relate to charges alleging child pornography - filming and possession - claimed recent appellate court case not considered prior to giving advice - claimed pleas of guilty therefore uninformed - material constituting the alleged child pornography depicted images where subjects qualified as children - the circumstances of their depiction could cause offence to reasonable persons - the images of children portrayed them in sexual context - advice to appellant based upon proper criteria - client was properly informed by advice given - appellant's pleas were informed pleas - no real opportunity for acquital lost.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 Poisons Act 1966

CASES CITED: DPP v Annetts (2009) NSWCCA 86

PARTIES: Regina Andrew Lamons Cemitis

FILE NUMBER(S): 2008/11994

COUNSEL: Defence: S Orman-Hales and G Jauncey

SOLICITORS: Crown: Mr C Bailey

JUDGMENT Application to vacate pleas of guilty earlier entered 1. This is an application by Andrew Lamons Cemitis to vacate a plea earlier entered. In his introductory remarks to his submission the Crown set out, it seems to me very satisfactorily, if I may say so, what the matter was all about and I take from his submissions the following.

The Course of Proceedings

2. The applicant, represented by counsel, was arraigned at Moree District Court on 10 March 2009 on an indictment containing five counts. The applicant entered pleas of guilty to two counts of production of child pornography (s 91H Crimes Act 1900), one count of possession of child pornography (s 91H), and one count of using an offensive weapon to hinder apprehension (s 33B). The prosecution accepted those pleas in full satisfaction of the indictment. No convictions were recorded and the case was adjourned for sentence.