Regina v Eyles [2002] NSWCCA 510

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Eyles [2002] NSWCCA 510 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60235/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 2 July 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 20 December 2002

PARTIES : Regina v Kenneth John Eyles JUDGMENT OF : Handley JA at 1; Dowd J at 2; Smart AJ at 3

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 97/21/1062 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Gibson DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : (A) M C Ramage QC (C) P Power SOLICITORS : (A) Voros Lawyers (C) S E O'Connor CATCHWORDS : Tendency evidence incorrectly admitted as wrong test applied - highly prejudicial - inadequate warning by judge - verdict unreasonable and not supported by the evidence. LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995 R v Johnson (1998) 45 NSWLR 362 R v BWT [2002] NSWCCA 60 R v SJB [2002] NSWCCA 163 CASES CITED: Longman v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 79 Cramnpton v The Queen [2000] HCA 60, 75 ALJR 133 Doggett v The Queen [2001]HCA 46, 76 ALJR 1290 M v The Queen (1994) 18 CLR 487 at 493-494 MFA v The Queen [2002] HCA 53 DECISION : See para 69

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60235/01 HANDLEY JA DOWD J SMART AJ Friday, 20 December 2002

REGINA v KENNETH JOHN EYLES JUDGMENT

1. HANDLEY JA: I agree with Smart AJ.

2. DOWD J: I have read and agree with the proposed orders and reasons of Smart AJ.

3. SMART AJ: At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeal on 2 July 2002 this Court announced that it proposed to allow the appeal and quash the convictions of the appellant but that it had not decided whether it would order a new trial. The appellant was granted bail. I now set out my reasons for participating in those orders and for declining to order a new trial.