NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Application by Cartman (a pseudonym) pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) [2022] NSWSC 308 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 23 March 2022 Decision date: 23 March 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Dhanji J Decision: (1) Application granted. (2) I direct that pursuant to s 79(1)(b) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), the whole of the applicant's case is referred to the Court of Criminal Appeal to be dealt with as an appeal against conviction. (3) The applicant's case be listed before the Registrar of the Court of Criminal Appeal for further directions as soon as reasonably practicable. Catchwords: CRIME – Appeal and review – application to Supreme Court for inquiry into conviction under Part 7 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 – new evidence – whether new evidence casts a doubt or question as to the credibility of the complainant – whether attempt to "rerun the trial on the papers" – complainant's evidence as to the applicant's outfit critical to her account – evidence suggests error in complainant's account – doubt as to guilt found – not an attempt to rerun the trial on the papers given additional evidence Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW), s 3C Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), ss 15A, 15B Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), ss 78, 79 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61J, 66C(3), 474C, 474E, 475 Crimes Legislation (Review of Convictions) Amendment Act 1993 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 2, 5, 5AA, 6, 8, 26 Criminal Law Amendment Act 1883 (NSW) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 133(1), 306U Criminal Records Act 1991 (NSW), s 7(1)(b) Cases Cited: Application by Brian Steer under Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2020] NSWSC 623 Application by Sef Gonzales pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1412 Application of Peter James Holland under s.78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2008] NSWSC 251 Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT) (2003) 214 CLR 318; [2003] HCA 28 Grierson v The King (1938) 60 CLR 431; [1938] HCA 45 Mickelberg v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 259; [1989] HCA 35 R v Johns (1999) 110 A Crim R 149 R v Pollock [2005] NSWCCA 316 Sinkovich v Attorney General of New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 783; [2013] NSWCA 383 State of NSW v Norstead [2019] NSWSC 1095 Varley v Attorney General (NSW) (1987) 8 NSWLR 30 WGC v The Queen (2007) 233 CLR 66; [2007] HCA 58 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Erica Cartman (a pseudonym) (Applicant) Attorney General of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: K Heath (Applicant) M Dalla-Pozza (Respondent)
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