NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 158 A Crim 454
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Harris v R [2005] NSWCCA 432
HEARING DATE(S): 6 December 2005
JUDGMENT DATE: 14 December 2005
JUDGMENT OF: Grove J at 1; Studdert J at 6; Whealy J at 66
DECISION: Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - admissibility of statement by deceased victim - whether made "shortly after" the asserted fact - whether in circumstances that made it unlikely that the representations a fabrication - Evidence Act s65(2)(b). CRIMINAL LAW - summing up - self defence - whether jury sufficiently alerted as to need for Crown to exclude reasonable possibility of the appellant having acted in self defence.
Criminal Appeal Rules, r 4 LEGISLATION CITED: Evidence Act, s 65
Conway v The Queen (2000) 98 FCR 204 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321 Liberato v The Queen (1984-85) 159 CLR 507 R v Ambrosoli (2002) 55 NSWLR 603 R v Burt (2003) 140 A Crim R 555 CASES CITED: R v Ita (2003) 139 A Crim R 340 R v Mankotia (unreported, Sperling J, 27 July 1998) R v Polkinghorne (1999) 108 A Crim R 189 R v Thomson & Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 Saulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Limited (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 Williams v The Queen (2000) 199 A Crim R 490
PARTIES: Frederick O'Neal Harris v Regina
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2005/1292
H. Dhanji (Appellant) COUNSEL: D. Frearson SC (Crown)
S. O'Connor (Appellant) SOLICITORS: S. Kavanagh (Crown)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
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