NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : R v Styman; R v Taber [2004] NSWCCA 245 HEARING DATE(S) : 19 February 2004 20 February 2004 JUDGMENT DATE : 10 September 2004
JUDGMENT OF : Sheller JA at 1; Sperling J at 1; Adams J at 1 DECISION : 1. Appeals allowed in part; 2. In the case of each appellant, quash the verdict of guilty of murder; 3. There be a new trial of each appellant upon the charge of manslaughter; 4. Provided that Order 3 is subject to the condition that the Crown has liberty to apply within 28 days for orders under s7(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 substituting verdicts of guilty of manslaughter, failing which, the order is to take effect; 5. Grant leave to appeal against the sentences imposed on each appellant for aggravated breaking and entering and committing a serious indictable offence and set aside those sentences; 6. Direct that the proceedings be listed before the Registrar for directions as to the filing of further written submissions and to fix a further hearing for resentencing before this Court.
CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - murder - reckless indifference to human life - omission to remove from danger - causation - effect of 000 call - whether trial Judge correct in refusing to direct verdicts of acquittal - directions on murder and manslaughter - whether accompanying mental elements correctly stated - whether causation of death should have been left to the jury - whether verdicts of murder unreasonable - whether open to jury to conclude that the accused, having put the deceased in danger of death, fully realised, at any time before her death, that she would probably die unless they acted to rescue her or procure her rescue - s7(2) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 - whether there should be a new trial on the alternative count of manslaughter - whether sentences for aggravated robbery excessive LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s6, s7 Campbell v The Queen [1981] WAR 286; (1980) 2 A Crim R 157 Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439 Lawford & Anor v R (1993) 61 SASR 542 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 CASES CITED : People v Beardsley (1907) 113 NW 1128 R v Crabbe (1985) 156 CLR 464 R v Miller [1980] 2 QB 532 (Court of Appeal); [1983] 2 AC 175 (House of Lords) R v Taktak (1988) 14 NSWLR 226; Royall v The Queen (1990) 172 CLR 378 Taktak v R (1983) 34 A Crim R 334 Ian Craig Styman - Appellant PARTIES : Peter David Taber - Appellant Crown FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 2003/3228 (60327/03); 2003/3044 (60326/03) Mr J C Papayanni for the Appellant Styman COUNSEL : Mr G D Wendler for the Appellant Taber Mr R D Cogswell SC with Mr M C Grogan for the Crown SOLICITORS : Van Houten Solicitors for the Appellants Director of Public Prosecutions
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