Karacic v R [2019] NSWCCA 195

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Karacic v R [2019] NSWCCA 195 Hearing dates: 2 August 2019 Date of orders: 19 August 2019 Decision date: 19 August 2019 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Wright J at [3]; Wilson J at [4]. Decision: (1) Extend the time in which to bring an application for leave to appeal until 5 December 2018. (2) Leave to appeal granted. (3) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – appeal against sentence – unrepresented applicant – question of commencement date of sentence – assessment of prospects of rehabilitation – asserted manifest excess Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Cases Cited: Kaderavek v R [2018] NSWCCA 92 R v Henry (1996) NSWLR 346 R v Qutami (2001) 127 A Crim R 369 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Tony Karacic (applicant) Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (respondent) Representation: Applicant in person D Patch for respondent File Number(s): 2016/00099265 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: District Court of NSW Jurisdiction: Criminal Date of Decision: 17 November 2017 Before: Her Honour Judge J Girdham SC File Number(s): 2016/00099265

Judgment 1. BASTEN JA: In circumstances fully recounted by Wilson J, the applicant was sentenced for two offences of armed robbery, following a trial and verdicts of guilty. While it is true that the applicant is unrepresented, the grounds of appeal simply fail to engage with the careful, well-reasoned judgment on sentence delivered by Girdham SC DCJ. As Wilson J demonstrates, there was no identifiable error in that judgment, nor was the sentence manifestly excessive. 2. I agree that the applicant should have an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal. However, on its face this is a case in which leave to appeal should be refused. I am content to grant leave, but the appeal must, for the reasons given by Wilson J, be dismissed. 3. WRIGHT J: I agree with the orders proposed by Wilson J for the reasons that her Honour has given. 4. WILSON J: At the conclusion of his trial in September 2017 the applicant was found guilty by a jury of two counts contrary to s 97(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) of robbery whilst armed with a dangerous weapon. Such an offence carries a maximum sentence of 25 years imprisonment. 5. On 17 November 2017 he was sentenced in the District Court by her Honour Judge Girdham SC to an aggregate term of imprisonment of six years and three months, with a non-parole period of four years and two months, pursuant to s 53A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW). The indicative sentence for each count was a term of 6 years imprisonment. 6. The applicant now seeks leave to appeal against that sentence, out of time by a number of days, and advances five proposed grounds of appeal. Those grounds, as articulated, are: 1. "The trial judge erred on backdating the sentence (Applicant effectively doing 4 years 10 months). 2. The trial judge erred on parity to other crimes of similar nature. 3. Evidence of Rehabilitation – Judge erred saying "prospects of rehabilitation poor". 4. Judge erred on taking offenders criminal history for Armed Robbery in 2003 sentencing. The judge stated he received 4 years for 1 Armed Robbery when in fact it was 5 and 3 on form 1. 5. Sentence is manifestly excessive."