NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 67 NSWLR 659
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Livermore v R [2006] NSWCCA 334 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 5 June 2006
JUDGMENT DATE: 20 October 2006
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; Johnson J at 1; Latham J at 1
DECISION: 1. Appeal allowed; 2. Convictions and sentences imposed on the Appellant on 5 August 2005 are quashed; 3. Order a new trial.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - jury trial - extravagant and improper submissions in closing address of Crown Prosecutor - role and duties of prosecutor - need for compliance with professional ethical rules and statutory guidelines concerning duties of prosecutor - miscarriage of justice - conviction quashed and new trial ordered
LEGISLATION CITED: Crown Prosecutors Act 1986 Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986
R v McCullough (1982) 6 A Crim R 274 KNP v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 213 R v Joseph Attallah [2005] NSWCCA 277 R v Liristis (2004) 146 A Crim R 547 R v Rugari (2001) 122 A Crim R 1 CASES CITED: Whitehorn v The Queen (1983) 152 CLR 657 R v MRW (1999) 113 A Crim R 308 R v Janceski (2005) 64 NSWLR 10 Subramaniam v The Queen (2004) 79 ALJR 116; [2004] HCA 51 Weiss v The Queen (2005) 80 ALJR 444 ; [2005] HCA 81 R v Kennedy (2000) 118 A Crim R 34 R v Callaghan (1993) 70 A Crim R 350
PARTIES: Dean John Livermore (Appellant) Regina (Respondent)
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2006/391
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