NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 120 A Crim R 161
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : Regina v Taha; Regina v Yuksel [2000] NSWCCA 520 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60541/00; 60542/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 04/12/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 4 December 2000
PARTIES : Regina v Mustafa Taha; Regina v Sedat Yuksel JUDGMENT OF : Meagher JA at 1, 60 & 67; Hidden J at 61; Carruthers AJ at 2
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 99/21/0264; 99/21/0265 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Coorey DCJ OFFICER :
(Crown): P G Berman SC COUNSEL : (Respondent Taha): R S Toner SC (Respondent Yuksel): J Manuell (Crown): S E O'Connor SOLICITORS : (Respondent Taha): Craddock Murray & Neumann (Respondent Yuksel): D J Humphreys CATCHWORDS : SENTENCING - Crown appeals against inadequacy - aggravated robbery in company - whether sentencing judge erred in not holding that weapon was loaded at the time of the robbery - retrospective operation of the doctrine of continuance applied. LEGISLATION CITED : Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Crimes Act 1900 Beresford v Justices of St Albans (1905) 22 T.L.R. 1 R v Olejarnik (1994) 33 NSWLR 567 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 CASES CITED: R v Morrissey (CCA, unreported, 15 July 1994) R v Doorey [2000] NSWCCA 456 R v Silver [1999] NSWCCA 108 R v Tran (1999] NSWCCA 109 DECISION : See paragraph 59 (R v Taha) See paragraph 56 (Regina v Yuksel)
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60541/00 60542/00
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