CASE FILES from: 26 May 2015 to 11 December 2015
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 11 December 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Accused charged with murder – Evidence of accused at shooting range before and after deceased’s murder – Whether evidence relevant
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 14 August 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Where counsel for accused given leave to withdraw from proceedings – Where accused left without counsel as a consequence – Necessity to vacate trial date – Referral of conduct of counsel to the Registrar with a direction that advice be obtained as to whether there has been a contempt of Court
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 11 August 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Where counsel for accused opened to jury raising good character of the accused – Where Crown sought leave to cross- examine the accused and lead evidence of bad character in reply – Where advance ruling sought – Whether evidence would unduly add to the length of the trial – Whether evidence important – Weight to be attached to the evidence – Whether unfair to the accused – Advance ruling made granting the Crown’s application for leave CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Where counsel for accused opened to jury raising good character of the accused – Where Crown sought leave to cross-examine the accused and lead evidence of bad character in reply - Where counsel for co-accused made application for leave to cross-examine on the same evidence – Where such application made independently of the application for leave made by the Crown – Whether evidence relevant and admissible – Advance ruling made refusing the application for leave WORDS AND PHRASES – “Unduly”
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 10 August 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Practice and procedure – Jury trial – Necessity to ensure that there be no media publication of applications dealt with in the absence of the jury
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 06 August 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Claim for client legal privilege – Where witness made a statement to the police – Where contents of statement made reference to legal advice provided to the witness in association with criminal charges brought against him – Where contents of the statement made reference to the charges having been the subject of discussion between the witness and his lawyers - Whether privilege lost
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 06 August 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Application by Crown for view of locations relevant to the Crown case – Where view would assist the jury in understanding the evidence – Where application supported by both accused – Application granted
- Decision date
- 31 July 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Costs – Where Subpoena issued to the Australian Crime Commission for production of documents – Where Commission relied upon statutory immunity – Where statutory immunity and relevant authorities were drawn to the attention of the accused’s legal representatives – Where Commission repeatedly foreshadowed the making of an application for costs in the event that it was necessary to move to set the Subpoena aside – Where Commission afforded the accused’s representatives the opportunity to withdraw the Subpoena without seeking costs – Where matter proceeded to hearing and Subpoena was set aside – Whether costs should be awarded in favour of the Commission – Relevance of the right of an accused to a fair trial in determining whether costs should be awarded – Order for costs made in favour of the Commission
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 28 July 2015
Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Practice and procedure – Opening address to jury by counsel for accused following the opening address of the Crown – Where counsel commented upon suggested submissions which might be made by counsel for co-accused – Where counsel made reference to material which was prejudicial to the co-accused – Discussion of limitations placed upon an opening address by counsel for an accused - Where counsel’s address exceeded those limitations in a way which was prejudicial to the co-accused – Where application made by co-accused that the jury be discharged - Application granted – Jury discharged
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 27 July 2015
Catchwords:
EVIDENCE – Tendency Evidence relied upon by the Crown – Whether evidence met the test of significant probative value
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 27 July 2015
Catchwords:
EVIDENCE – Observations by witness as to demeanour of accused – Whether evidence of observations was evidence of opinion – Whether evidence relevant EVIDENCE - Observations by witness of a “lump” in accused’s pocket - Where Crown sought to infer that the lump was a gun - Where deceased killed by a the hand gun - Where hand gun not recovered - Where observation of the lump was made several hours following the death of the deceased - Where co-accused asserting duress constituted by threats with firearm - Whether evidence relevant EVIDENCE - Evidence threatening of statements made by the accused regarding the daughters of the co-accused - Where co-accused asserting duress constituted by threats with firearm - Whether evidence of statements relevant
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 21 July 2015
Catchwords:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Juries – Where revised estimate of trial increased its likely length from 8 weeks to in excess of 12 weeks – Three additional jurors to be selected – No point of principle
Catchwords:
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 21 July 2015
EVIDENCE – Tendency evidence – Where both accused charged with murder and supplying a prohibited drug – Application by one-accused to rely upon certain evidence as tendency evidence – Whether such evidence relevant to a fact in issue – Whether the evidence went to the credibility of the co-accused – Applicability of Part 3.6 of the Evidence Act NSW 1995 (NSW) – Application refused PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Applications by each of two co-accused for separate trials – Where both accused charged with murder and supplying a prohibited drug – Where Crown case in respect of murder count based upon a joint criminal enterprise – Where murder count and supply count linked - Where majority of evidence relied upon by the Crown admissible against both accused in respect of both counts – Where one accused foreshadowed application to cross-examine co-accused about prior criminal convictions – Where that same accused was allegedly threatened by co-accused – General principles applicable to the exercise of the discretion to order separate trials – Both applications for separate trials refused PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application by one accused for an order that the counts of murder and supply prohibited drug be tried separately – Where counts inextricably linked – No justification for separation of counts – Application refused
- • Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 14 July 2015
Catchwords:
EVIDENCE – Evidence of hearsay representations of deceased – Whether admissible
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 26 May 2015
Catchwords:
EVIDENCE – Two accused charged with murder and supplying a prohibited drug – Where proposed Crown witness was the daughter of one of the accused – Where witness made statements to police – Evidence of statements made to the witness by the Solicitor for one of the accused which were threatening in nature – Objection taken by the witness to giving evidence – Objection based upon likelihood of harm to the witness, as well as likelihood of harm to the relationship with her father – Balancing exercise – Objection upheld – Ordered that the witness not be required to give evidence WORDS AND PHRASES – “likelihood” – “harm”
- Judgment of
- Bellew J
- Decision date
- 26 May 2015
Catchwords:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to set aside Subpoena – Statutory immunity from production – Whether appropriate or necessary to cross-examine the deponent of affidavit in support of the application to set aside PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Subpoena seeking production of documents by the Australian Crime Commission – Where Commission not required to produce documents unless (inter alia) necessary for the purposes of a prosecution instituted as a result of an operation or investigation carried out by the Commission in performance of its functions – Where evidence that prosecution of accused was not so instituted – Subpoena set aside WORDS AND PHRASES – “necessary” – “prosecution”
No comments:
Post a Comment