R v Milan Banic [2018] NSWDC 55

R v Milan Banic [2018] NSWDC 55

The offences were each in the low range of objective seriousness, but imprisonment was required because of the ongoing drug supply, proceeds of crime and identity information offending, the need for general and specific deterrence, and the absence of any appropriate alternative. The offender's moral culpability was slightly reduced by PTSD and drug addiction, and his remorse, guilty pleas, abstinence in custody and rehabilitation prospects mitigated sentence. An aggregate sentence of 4 years and 6 months with a 3 year non-parole period was appropriate, with special circumstances to allow longer parole supervision, and the offender was eligible for referral to the Drug Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Pleas of Guilty in the Local Court
Outcome
The offender was convicted on each offence and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 3 years, and referred to the Drug Court for consideration of a compulsory drug treatment order.
Legal Topics
['supply Prohibited Drug on an Ongoing Basis' 'knowingly Deal With Proceeds of Crime' 'deal With Identity Information' 'plea of Guilty' 'aggregate Sentence' 'drug Court Referral' 'compulsory Drug Treatment Order' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'remorse' 'rehabilitation' 'mental Condition' 'drug Addiction']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Pleas of Guilty in the Local Court

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for supply prohibited drug on an ongoing basis, knowingly dealing with proceeds of crime and eight counts of dealing with identity information after pleas of guilty.' "Whether the offender's PTSD, substance use disorder, remorse and prospects of rehabilitation mitigated sentence." 'Whether no penalty other than imprisonment was appropriate.' 'Whether an aggregate sentence and special circumstances were appropriate.' 'Whether the offender should be referred to the Drug Court to determine whether he should be subject to a compulsory drug treatment order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offences were each in the low range of objective seriousness, but imprisonment was required because of the ongoing drug supply, proceeds of crime and identity information offending, the need for general and specific deterrence, and the absence of any appropriate alternative. The offender's moral culpability was slightly reduced by PTSD and drug addiction, and his remorse, guilty pleas, abstinence in custody and rehabilitation prospects mitigated sentence. An aggregate sentence of 4 years and 6 months with a 3 year non-parole period was appropriate, with special circumstances to allow longer parole supervision, and the offender was eligible for referral to the Drug Court.

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted on each offence and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 3 years, and referred to the Drug Court for consideration of a compulsory drug treatment order.

Orders

  • ['For each offence the offender is convicted.' 'I impose an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 3 years. The sentence is to date from 15 November 2016. The non-parole period will expire on 14 November 2019 and the head sentence will expire on 14 May 2021.' 'The offender...