NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hewitt v R [2021] NSWCCA 227 Hearing dates: 23 August 2021 Date of orders: 24 September 2021 Decision date: 24 September 2021 Before: Payne JA at [1]; Garling J at [82]; Wright J at [83] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal on ground 1 refused under r 4.15 of the Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021; (2) Leave to appeal on ground 2 granted under r 4.15 of the Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021; (3) Appeal allowed; (4) The applicant's conviction on count 2 in the indictment is quashed; (5) The proceedings are remitted to the District Court arraignment list at Gosford on 30 September 2021. Catchwords: CRIME — appeals — appeal against conviction — miscarriage of justice — whether trial judge failed to put defence case fairly before the jury CRIME — appeals — appeal against conviction — miscarriage of justice — whether trial judge failed to give the jury a full Liberato direction Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61I, 61L, 578A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5(1)(b), 6(1) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 161 Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021, r 4.15 Cases Cited: ARS v R [2011] NSWCCA 266 BRS v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 275; [1997] HCA 47 Burns v The Queen (1975) 132 CLR 258; [1975] HCA 21 Castle v The Queen (2016) 259 CLR 449; [2016] HCA 46 Cotic v The Queen [2000] WASCA 414; (2000) 118 A Crim R 393 De Silva v The Queen (2019) 268 CLR 57; [2019] HCA 48 Dixon v R [2017] NSWCCA 299 Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555; [1992] HCA 13 Flood-Smith v R [2018] NSWCCA 103 Greenhalgh v R [2017] NSWCCA 94 Hargraves v The Queen (2011) 245 CLR 257; [2011] HCA 44 Kalbasi v Western Australia (2018) 264 CLR 62; [2018] HCA 7 Liberato v The Queen (1985) 159 CLR 507; [1985] HCA 66 Magill v The Queen (2013) 42 VR 616; [2013] VSCA 259 McKey v R [2012] NSWCCA 1; (2012) 219 A Crim R 227 OKS v Western Australia (2019) 265 CLR 268; [2019] HCA 10 R v Baker [2001] QCA 326 R v D'Orta‐Ekenaike [1998] 2 VR 140; (1997) 99 A Crim R 454 R v Davis [1999] NSWCCA 15 R v Eastman (No 50) [2018] ACTSC 321 R v Green (2002) 4 VR 471; [2002] VSCA 34 R v Koeleman (2000) 2 VR 20; [2000] VSCA 141 R v Perera [1986] 1 Qd R 211 R v Russo (No 2) [2006] VSCA 297 R v Schaeffer (2005) 13 VR 337; [2005] VSCA 306 R v Williams [1999] NSWCCA 9; (1999) 104 A Crim R 260 RPS v The Queen (2000) 199 CLR 620; [2000] HCA 3 The Queen v Dookheea (2017) 262 CLR 402; [2017] HCA 36 The Queen v Getachew (2012) 248 CLR 22; [2012] HCA 10 Texts Cited: Judicial Commission of New South Wales, Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mitchell Lenox Hewitt (Applicant) Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: R Pontello SC with M Smith (Applicant) M Millward (Crown)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate