NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 139 A Crim R 389
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : R v Collisson [2003] NSWCCA 212 HEARING DATE(S) : 21 July 2003 JUDGMENT DATE : 29 July 2003
JUDGMENT OF : Tobias JA at 1; James J at 38; Howie J at 39 DECISION : Appeal dismissed
CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - Appeal on conviction - Trial judge refused to make an order under s128(5) of Evidence Act requiring witness (the accused's accomplice) to give evidence on basis that his evidence was "inherently suspect" and charge against accomplice had not yet been dealt with - No knowledge by either party as to what the witness might say - Whether trial judge erred in applying the "inherently suspect" principle to the witness when considering whether the interests of justice required the witness to give evidence - Non-reportable - Non-distributable LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995, s128(5), s128(6), s128(7), s165, s165 CASES CITED : R v Booth (1982) NSWLR 847 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 PARTIES : Regina David Leonard Collisson FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60151/02 COUNSEL : M Austin for the Appellant R Hulme SC for the Crown SOLICITORS : D J Humphreys for the Appellant S E O'Connor for the Crown
LOWER COURT Supreme Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 70062/01 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Whealy J JUDICIAL OFFICER :
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CCA 60151/02
TOBIAS JA B JAMES J HOWIE J
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