NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Em v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 336
HEARING DATE(S): 19 June 2006
JUDGMENT DATE: 3 November 2006
JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA at 1; Grove J at 134; Hidden J at 135
DECISION: (1) In the conviction appeal, appeal dismissed; (2) In the sentence appeal, grant leave to appeal but dismiss the appeal.
CATCHWORDS: EVIDENCE - exclusion of admission if unfair to use it (Evidence Act s 90) - offender aware not obliged to speak to police - believed conversation with police could not be used against him if not recorded - unaware that conversation was being recorded - police not responsible for erroneous belief - even if police aware of erroneous belief, not unfair to use admissions - DIRECTIONS - that admissions were unreliable squarely raised by defence case - no need for warning that admissions may not have been reliable - SENTENCING - whether sentences manifestly excessive - or error in failing to find special circumstances - or in degree of cumulation of sentences - or flawed on parity grounds - on facts, no error in these respects.
LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s 5F Evidence Act 1995, ss 85,90, 138
Attorney General for the State of NSW v X (2000) 49 NSWLR 653; Bromley v The Queen (1986) 161 CLR 315; Carr v The Queen (1988) 165 CLR 314; Crofts v The Queen (1996) 186 CLR 427; DPP v Attallah [2001] NSWCA 171; Duke v The Queen (1989) 180 CLR 508; House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; The King v Lee (1950) 82 CLR 133; Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; Mc Dermott v The King (1948) 76 CLR 501; Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 297; The Queen v Noakes(1986) 42 SASR 489; The Queen v Swaffield (1997) 192 CLR 159; R v Baartmann [2000] NSWCCA 298; CASES CITED: R v Christie [2000] NSWCCA 354 R v Sophear Em [2003] NSWCCA 374; R v Fowler (2003) 151 A Crim R 166; R v Gordon (1994) 71 A Crim R 459; R v Henry (1996) 46 NSWLR 346; R v Kyriakou (1987) 29 A Crim R 50; R v Lyberopoulos [2002] NSWCCA 280; R v Makisi (2004) 151 A Crim R 245; R v McKenzie (CCA, 16 September 1998, unreported); R v Sharpe [2002] NSWCCA 96; R v Stackelroth (CCA, 9 April 1997, unreported); R v Tofilau [2006] VSCA 40; R v Vann [2006] NSWCCA 260; Van der Meer v The Queen (1989) 62 ALJR 656; Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465;
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