R v Stefan Mihajlovic [2019] NSWDC 74

R v Stefan Mihajlovic [2019] NSWDC 74

The Crown did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew of the $400,320.00 secreted in the van or intended to deal with it. When the established facts were considered as a whole, the circumstantial case did not lead to an unavoidable conclusion of guilt; at least one reasonable conclusion consistent with innocence remained, including that the accused had no knowledge of the money and that Mr Martins had arranged for its delivery to someone in Melbourne.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution on Indictment for Dealing With Proceeds of Crime / Judge Alone Trial; Judgment on Verdict
Outcome
Verdict of not guilty
Legal Topics
['deal With Proceeds of Crime' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'burden and Standard of Proof' 'judge Alone Trial' 'unlawful Search Evidence Admitted Under S 138(1) of the Evidence Act (nsw) 1995']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['deal With Proceeds of Crime' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'burden and Standard of Proof' 'judge Alone Trial' 'unlawful Search Evidence Admitted Under S 138(1) of the Evidence Act (nsw) 1995']

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 Prosecution on Indictment for Dealing With Proceeds of Crime / Judge Alone Trial; Judgment on Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused dealt with the $400,320.00 found secreted in the van.' 'Whether the circumstantial evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew of the presence of the money and intended to deal with it.' 'Whether there was a reasonable conclusion consistent with innocence, namely that the accused had no knowledge of the money secreted in the van.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew of the $400,320.00 secreted in the van or intended to deal with it. When the established facts were considered as a whole, the circumstantial case did not lead to an unavoidable conclusion of guilt; at least one reasonable conclusion consistent with innocence remained, including that the accused had no knowledge of the money and that Mr Martins had arranged for its delivery to someone in Melbourne.

Court Disposition

Verdict of not guilty

Orders

  • ['Verdict of not guilty']