Vikramdeep SINGH v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (NSW) [2006] NSWCCA 333

Reported Decision : 164 A Crim R 284

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: Vikramdeep SINGH v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (NSW) [2006] NSWCCA 333 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.

HEARING DATE(S): 22 August 2006

JUDGMENT DATE: 18 October 2006

JUDGMENT OF: Basten JA at 1; Whealy J at 76; Latham J at 77

DECISION: (1) Leave to appeal granted; (2) Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: UNFAIR TRIAL – conduct of co-accused – Appellant and co-accused tried together – whether conduct by co-accused's counsel inflammatory, to the extent of being improper or unfair to the Appellant – refusal to admit evidence going to the credit of co-accused – failure to warn jury as to unreliability of the co-accused's evidence against the Appellant – no direction requested under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 165 – failure to give directions with respect to evidence of flight - SENTENCE – "special circumstances" for the purposes of s 44(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – balance of period of the sentence not exceeding one-third of the non-parole period

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 33, 35, 98 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A, 44, 54D LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 6 Criminal Appeal Rules, r 4 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 9, 102, 103, 112, 135, 138, 164, 165 Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW), s 5

Conway v The Queen (2002) 209 CLR 203 Jenkins v The Queen (2004) 79 ALJR 252; [2004] HCA 57 Kanaan v R [2006] NSWCCA 109 Longman v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 79 Melbourne v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 1 CASES CITED: Papakosmas v The Queen (1999) 196 CLR 297 R v Hampton (1998) 44 NSWLR 729 R v ITA (2003) 139 A Crim R 340 R v Moffitt (1990) 20 NSWLR 114 R v Stewart (2001) 52 NSWLR 301 Stanoevski v The Queen (2001) 202 CLR 115 Zoneff v The Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234