NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Mouroufas v R [2007] NSWCCA 58
HEARING DATE(S): 27/02/2007
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 March 2007
JUDGMENT OF: Sully J at 1; Bell J at 2; Hoeben J at 3
DECISION: Appeal upheld, conviction and sentence quashed. New trial to be held.
CATCHWORDS: Conviction appeal - whether an "identification" direction required under s116 and 165 of the Evidence Act 1995 - appellant's counsel elicited evidence of the whole of the appellant's criminal record - whether unfairness resulted - whether any rational or reasonable explanation for eliciting this evidence - miscarriage of justice - whether "cultivation of not less than the commercial quantity of plants" requires the actual handling of that number of plants by an offender for the element of the offence to be made out.
Criminal Appeal Rules 1912 LEGISLATION CITED: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Evidence Act 1995
Ali v The Queen (2005) 214 ALR 1 Dawson v The Queen (1961) 106 CLR 1 at 16 Dhanhoa v The Queen (2003) 217 CLR 1 Hall v Braybrook (1955) 95 CLR 620 at 629 Mraz v The Queen (1955) 93 CLR 493 per Fullagar J at 514 Nudd v The Queen (2006) 225 ALR 161 CASES CITED: R v Bruno (CCA unreported, 19 June 1997) R v Demiroz [2003] NSWCCA 146 at [63] R v Giorgi and Romeo (1981) 7 A Crim R 305 R v Miletic (1977) 1 VR 593 Regina v Ruiz Avila [2003] NSWCCA 264 Seymour v R [2006] NSWCCA 206 TKWJ v The Queen (2002) 212 CLR 124 Wilde v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365 at 371-372
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