R v Basanovic and ors (No. 2) [2015] NSWSC 1085

R v Basanovic and ors (No. 2) [2015] NSWSC 1085

The evidence of Mrs Mitrovic and Mr Cassaniti was admissible. The deceased's statement was admissible under s 65(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). The evidence about the disputed debt was relevant because, on the Crown opening, it provided background explaining why the accused were present at the deceased's premises on 15 January 2013. The objections confused motive for involvement in a joint criminal enterprise with formation of the enterprise itself, and no unfairness arose from the Crown opening after the Crown's clarification.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Procedural and Other Ruling / Admissibility Objection During Trial
Outcome
The evidence of Mrs Mitrovic and the evidence of Mr Cassaniti are admissible.
Legal Topics
['joint Criminal Enterprise' 'relevance' 'background Evidence' 'crown Opening' 'hearsay' 'statement by Deceased']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['joint Criminal Enterprise' 'relevance' 'background Evidence' 'crown Opening' 'hearsay' 'statement by Deceased']

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 Law Procedural and Other Ruling / Admissibility Objection During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether evidence from Suzana Mitrovic about the deceased's telephone conversation and subsequent statement was admissible despite a hearsay objection." 'Whether evidence from Suzana Mitrovic and Sam Cassaniti about a disputed debt allegedly owed by the deceased to Frank Bacic was relevant and admissible as background evidence.' 'Whether the Crown opening sufficiently identified the relationship between the disputed debt and the alleged joint criminal enterprise.']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of Mrs Mitrovic and Mr Cassaniti was admissible. The deceased's statement was admissible under s 65(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). The evidence about the disputed debt was relevant because, on the Crown opening, it provided background explaining why the accused were present at the deceased's premises on 15 January 2013. The objections confused motive for involvement in a joint criminal enterprise with formation of the enterprise itself, and no unfairness arose from the Crown opening after the Crown's clarification.

Court Disposition

The evidence of Mrs Mitrovic and the evidence of Mr Cassaniti are admissible.

Orders

  • ['The evidence of Mrs Mitrovic and the evidence of Mr Cassaniti are admissible.']