NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Higgins v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 56
HEARING DATE(S): 22/02/2007
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 March 2007
JUDGMENT OF: Sully J at 1; Bell J at 2; Hoeben J at 3
DECISION: In respect of Ground of Appeal 1 appeal is dismissed.; In respect of Ground of Appeal 2, leave to rely upon that ground is refused.
CATCHWORDS: Conviction appeal - evidence - statement made to bank investigators - admissions - whether interview oppressive in terms of s84 Evidence Act 1995 - whether unfairness under s90 of Evidence Act established - application of discretion under s90. - Summing up - whether jury adequately directed as to circumstantial evidence - redirection not asked for at trial.
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 Evidence Act 1995
Em v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 336 Grant v The Queen (1975) 11 ALR 503 at 504 R v Frangulis [2006] NSWCCA 363 R v Higgins [2006] NSWCCA 326 CASES CITED: R v Ita (2003) 139 A Crim R 340 at 355-7 R v Swaffield (1998) 192 CLR 159 R v Villa [2005] NSWCCA 4 at [74] R v Wilson (2005) 62 NSWLR 346 at 352-353 R v Zhang [2000] NSWSC 1099, Simpson J Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573 at 578
PARTIES: Graham Patrick Higgins - Appellant Crown - Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2006/2680
COUNSEL: C Smith - Applicant DC Frearson SC/N Noman - Crown
SOLICITORS: SE O'Connor - Legal Aid Commission of NSW - Appellant S Kavanagh - Solicitor for Public Prosecutions - Respondent
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