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

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

The Court concluded the jury was entitled to accept the complainant’s evidence; the applicant, as her teacher and appointed mentor, was in a position of authority; the sexual acts occurred without consent after the victim was prevented from leaving; the conviction appeal was dismissed. Regarding sentencing, the trial judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness as at the bottom of the range. Given the seriousness of the offending, the aggregate sentence initially imposed was manifestly inadequate. The Crown appeal was allowed, sentence quashed, and a new sentence imposed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment (conviction and Sentence)
Outcome
Conviction appeal dismissed; Crown sentence appeal allowed; sentence quashed and new aggregate sentence imposed.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Indecent Assault' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'teacher Student Authority' 'sentencing' 'crown Appeals' 'objective Seriousness' 'consent' 'conviction Appeals']
['criminal Law'] ['aggravated Indecent Assault' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'teacher Student Authority' 'sentencing' 'crown Appeals' 'objective Seriousness' 'consent' 'conviction Appeals']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment (conviction and Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether verdicts of guilty were unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence' "Whether complainant was 'under authority' of the offender" 'Assessment of objective seriousness for aggravated indecent assault and aggravated sexual intercourse' 'Whether sentence was manifestly inadequate']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded the jury was entitled to accept the complainant’s evidence; the applicant, as her teacher and appointed mentor, was in a position of authority; the sexual acts occurred without consent after the victim was prevented from leaving; the conviction appeal was dismissed. Regarding sentencing, the trial judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness as at the bottom of the range. Given the seriousness of the offending, the aggregate sentence initially imposed was manifestly inadequate. The Crown appeal was allowed, sentence quashed, and a new sentence imposed.

Court Disposition

Conviction appeal dismissed; Crown sentence appeal allowed; sentence quashed and new aggregate sentence imposed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against conviction is granted.' 'Appeal against conviction is dismissed.' 'Crown appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed on 9 April 2020 is quashed.' '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...