Regina v Vinh LE [2000] NSWCCA 49

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Vinh LE [2000] NSWCCA 49 revised - 14/07/2000 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60556/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 25/11/99 JUDGMENT DATE : 7 March 2000

PARTIES : Regina Vinh LE JUDGMENT OF : Sully J at 1; Hulme J at 69; Hidden J at 124

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 96/21/3351 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Tupman DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : R. Hulme - Crown G. P. Craddock - Applicant SOLICITORS : S. E. O'Connor - Crown T. A. Murphy - Applicant

LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Rules Graham v The Queen (1998) 157 CLR 404 Reg v AH (1997) 42 NSWLR 702 Pfennig v R (1995) 182 CLR 461 Hoch v R (1988) 165 CLR 292 Gipp v R (1998) 194 CLR 106 Sutton v R (1983-4) 152 CLR 528 Markby v R (1978) 140 CLR 108 CASES CITED: DPP v Boardman (1975) AC 421 Harris v DPP (1952) AC 694 Makin v AG (NSW) (1894) AC 57 Martin v Osborne (1936) 55 CLR 367 Shepherd v R (1990) 170 CLR 573 R v Pantoja (unreported) CCA, 5/11/98) R v Merritt [1999] NSWCCA 29 R v Kotzmann [1992] 2 VR 123 c.f. Penney v R (1998) 72 ALJR 1316 DECISION : Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60556/98 SULLY J HULME J HIDDEN J 7 March 2000

REGINA v Vinh LE

JUDGMENT

1 SULLY J: On 12 August 1998 Mr. Vinh Le, ["the appellant"], was presented for trial, in the District Court at Campbelltown and before her Honour Judge Tupman, upon an indictment containing twelve counts. Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 alleged various offences against a common victim, a Mrs. HL. Counts 6, 7 and 10 alleged, similarly, offences committed against a common victim, namely Miss TP, the daughter of Mrs. HL. Counts 8, 9, 11 and 12, also, alleged various offences against a common victim, namely JP, the son of Mrs. HL. 2 The appellant pleaded not guilty to each count in the indictment. He was put, accordingly, upon his trial by her Honour and a jury. On 28 August 1998 the jury returned verdicts of not guilty to counts 4 and 5; and returned verdicts of guilty to each of the remaining eight counts in the indictment. On 11 December 1998 the appellant was sentenced to various terms of penal servitude. No present challenge is made to those sentences, and nothing more need now be said about them. 3 In order to consider properly certain in particular of the grounds of appeal, it is necessary to note the following details of the twelve counts in the indictment upon which the appellant was tried.