R v SINANOVIC [2000] NSWCCA 397

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : R v SINANOVIC [2000] NSWCCA 397 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60023/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 4 February 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 11 December 2000

PARTIES : Regina Hakija Sinanovic JUDGMENT OF : Wood CJ at CL at 1; Hulme J at 2; Greg James J at 62

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 97/11/0597 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL McGuire DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : Crown: M Grogan Appellant: In person SOLICITORS : Crown: SE O'Connor Appellant: In person

DECISION : Appeal dismissed

- 22 - IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

No. 60023/99 WOOD CJ at CL HULME J GREG JAMES J

Monday, 11 December 2000 Regina v Hakija SINANOVIC JUDGMENT

1 WOOD CJ at CL: I have read the reasons for judgment of Hulme and Greg James J, and agree with the orders proposed. **********

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 60023/99

WOOD CJ AT CL HULME J GREG JAMES J Monday, 11 December 2000 REGINA -v- Hakija SINANOVIC JUDGMENT 2 HULME J: These proceedings are the fifth of 5 appeals brought by the Appellant against convictions in the District Court. Although represented in 2 of the appeals by Mr Coombs of counsel, who appeared for the Appellant in the trial which was the subject of this appeal, the Appellant was not formally represented in the appeal with which these Reasons are concerned. Again Mrs Sinanovic was allowed to speak on the Appellant's behalf although he himself also addressed the Court on some matters. 3 The relevant conviction occurred on 13 January 1999 and was in respect of a charge that, on 11 December 1995, at Sydney the Appellant did dishonestly obtain for himself a diamond ring by deception viz by representing that he would on that day deposit into the bank account of Stefano Designer Jewellery Pty Ltd a cheque for $27,000.00. The charge is one provided for under s178BA of the Crimes Act 1900 which prescribes a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. On 5 March 1999 Judge McGuire sentenced the Appellant to imprisonment for a minimum term of 16 months commencing on 16 May 2003 - the date after a previous sentence imposed by Judge Horler is due to expire - and an additional term of 12 months commencing on 16 September 2004. 4 In the Appellant's Notice of Appeal, the grounds of appeal are stated as follows:- 1. Trial by ambush 2. Trial without instructions. 3. No preparation. 4. Denied assistance. 5. Interference with jury members and crown. 6. Improper orders regarding defence's witness evidence. 7. Prejudice and discrimination. 5 In support of the appeal the court was provided with a page of written submissions which are impossible to summarise and therefore best to quote verbatim. This I have done. For convenience I have grouped these further submissions and numbered the groups as if they were additional grounds of appeal. "8. · Trial by ambush. · Denied natural justice · Denied right not to be tried unfairly. · Forced on notwithstanding the Crown failed to comply with orders to produce complete and full brief, documentation served during course of trial. · Prejudice towards Appellant not removed to satisfy a fair trial. 9. · No expert evidence or expert witness regarding foreign currency (Nicaragua Cordobas). · Judge did not hear Mr D Vernon from Westpac on a voir dire to establish if he was an expert witness. · No documentation Nicaragua Government Legislation, Banking Acts, Banking Circulars produced. 10. · Crown witness Skouras did not appear. · The absence of his evidence raises a doubt. 11. · There were two separate rings in question. 12. · The Judge did not once the jury was empanelled put to them if any of them knew any of the Crown witnesses or the accused. · It was not until the jury retired to the room and returned a juror informed the Judge he knew the accused. · He was dismissed. · If may well been discussions regarding the accused with other jurors forming a prejudice within the jurors' mind (sic). · There is no evidence to rule that out. (P12 7/1/99 L40). It then continues on P14 the jury asks "why is the accused not in the dock?