R v McCOY [2001] NSWCCA 255

Reported Decision : 51 NSWLR 702 123 A Crim R 81

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : R v McCOY [2001] NSWCCA 255 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60426 of 2000 HEARING DATE(S) : 4 July 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 4 July 2001

PARTIES : Regina Robert Ellis McCoy JUDGMENT OF : Giles JA at 1; Hulme J at 2; Adams J at 20

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 99/11/1072 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Shillington DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : Crown: MC Grogan Appellant: P Byrne SC SOLICITORS : Crown: SE O'Connor Appellant: Kremmer Townsend

DECISION : Appeal allowed; Conviction squashed; Verdict of acquittal entered

- 1 -IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CCA 60426/00

GILES JA HULME J ADAMS J 4 July 2001

REGINA v Robert Ellis McCOY JUDGMENT

1 GILES JA: I agree with Hulme J. __________ 2 HULME J: On 3 April 2000, the Appellant was convicted before His Honour Judge Shillington and a jury of a charge - "that he between 1 December 1995 and 30 June 1996 … did knowingly take part in the manufacture of a prohibited drug, namely methylamphetamine." 3 Despite the extent of the period encompassed by the charge, the matter was put to the jury on the basis of activities being carried on at, and just prior to, the time of the Appellant's arrest on 13 June 1996. This makes it unnecessary for this Court to consider whether the Appellant was involved in the manufacture, which apparently occurred, of methylamphetamine on other occasions or, as will be seen, on another basis. 4 On 9 June 2000, he was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 1 year such sentence being suspended upon the Appellant entering a good behaviour bond for a term of 1 year. 5 The Appellant appealed on 3 grounds: 1. The learned trial Judge erred in failing to direct the jury to find the appellant not guilty at the close of the Crown case. 2. The learned trial Judge erred in determining that the evidence was capable of proving the offence charged notwithstanding that there was evidence to establish that the offence was incapable of being committed by the appellant in the manner alleged. 3. The verdict of guilty is unreasonable, cannot be supported having regard to the evidence or otherwise represents a miscarriage of justice. 6 At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeal the Court ordered that the appeal be allowed, the appellant's conviction quashed, and a verdict of acquittal entered, with reasons to be published at a later date. There are my reasons for concurring in those orders.