R v Kelekci [2018] NSWSC 1209

R v Kelekci [2018] NSWSC 1209

Although the offence concerned evidence in a murder investigation, the offender's conduct was a single disposal of a jacket, involved a low degree of planning, occurred over a short period, was motivated by self-preservation, and only may have hampered the investigation given the strong other evidence. Taking into account the lower-end objective seriousness, the guilty plea, contrition, mental health and custody circumstances, reasonable rehabilitation prospects, the need for general deterrence and special circumstances, a sentence of imprisonment backdated to 2 June 2016 with a seven month non-parole period and four month balance of term was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
The offender was sentenced for hindering the discovery of evidence contrary to s 315(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).
Legal Topics
['hindering the Discovery of Evidence Concerning a Serious Indictable Offence' 'murder Investigation' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'objective Seriousness' 'special Circumstances' 'rehabilitation' 'general Deterrence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['hindering the Discovery of Evidence Concerning a Serious Indictable Offence' 'murder Investigation' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'objective Seriousness' 'special Circumstances' 'rehabilitation' 'general Deterrence']

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 Sentencing / Sentence After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for hindering the discovery of evidence concerning a serious indictable offence, being murder, contrary to s 315(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).' 'How the objective seriousness of the offence should be assessed, including the seriousness of the underlying offence, planning, duration, motive, and whether the investigation was actually hindered.' 'Whether mitigating factors, including depression and anxiety, protective custody, contrition, rehabilitation prospects and the guilty plea, should reduce the sentence.' 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the statutory ratio between the non-parole period and the balance of term.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offence concerned evidence in a murder investigation, the offender's conduct was a single disposal of a jacket, involved a low degree of planning, occurred over a short period, was motivated by self-preservation, and only may have hampered the investigation given the strong other evidence. Taking into account the lower-end objective seriousness, the guilty plea, contrition, mental health and custody circumstances, reasonable rehabilitation prospects, the need for general deterrence and special circumstances, a sentence of imprisonment backdated to 2 June 2016 with a seven month non-parole period and four month balance of term was appropriate.

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced for hindering the discovery of evidence contrary to s 315(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).

Orders

  • ['For the offence of hindering the discovery of evidence contrary to s 315(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), the offender is sentenced to a non-parole period of seven months commencing on 2 June 2016 and expiring on 1 January 2017 and a balance of term of four months commencing on 2 January 2017 to expire on 1 May...