NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Regina v Mosegaard [2005] NSWCCA 361 CITATION: This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 6 September 2005
JUDGMENT DATE: 27 October 2005
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; Grove J at 182; Smart AJ at 183
DECISION: By majority 1. Appeal against conviction dismissed; 2. Grant leave to appeal against sentence but dismiss the appeal Smart AJ (dissenting) 1. Allow the appeal on counts 2 and 3 and order a new trial
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction and sentence - sexual intercourse without consent and maliciously inflict actual bodily harm - unreasonable verdict - exclusion of evidence - miscarriage of justice
Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Osland v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 316 Queen v Farrell (1998) 194 CLR 286 Queen v Jones (1997) 191 CLR 439 R v Abou-Chabake [2004] NSWCCA 356 R v Barnett [2000] NSWCCA 283 R v Carbone [2000] NSWCCA 387 CASES CITED: R v Dixon [2001] NSWCCA 39 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82 R v Ranko Ignjatic (1993) 68 A Crim R 333 R v RAT (2000) 111 A Crim R 360 R v S [2001] NSWCCA 204 R v Tubou [2001] NSWCCA 243)
The Crown PARTIES: Jens Grandt Mosegaard (Appl)
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2005/865
J Bennett SC (Crown) COUNSEL: M Ierace SC (Appl)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown) SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Commission (Appl)
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