NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision: 70 NSWLR 696
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Trudgett v R [2008] NSWCCA 62 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 27 February 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 25 March 2008
JUDGMENT OF: Spigelman CJ at 1; Hulme J at 53; Latham J at 54
DECISION: Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – evidence law – identification and recognition evidence – whether direction to jury required – Evidence Act 1995, s 116 - WORDS & PHRASES – "identification evidence"
Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Appeal Rules 1952 Evidence Act 1995
Davies and Cody v The King (1937) 57 CLR 170 Dhanhoa v The Queen [2003] HCA 40; (2003) 217 CLR 1 Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555 Gardiner v R [2006] NSWCCA 190; (2006) 162 A Crim R 233 CASES CITED : Kelly v The Queen [2004] HCA 12; (2004) 218 CLR 216 R v Clarke (1997) 97 A Crim R 414 R v Demiroz [2003] NSWCCA 146 R v Spero [2006] VSCA 58; (2006) 13 VR 225 R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224 Smith v The Queen [2001] HCA 50; (2001) 206 CLR 650
PARTIES: Michael Beverley Trudgett (Appellant) Regina (Respondent)
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2006/5281
COUNSEL: S Corish (Appellant) J Dwyer (Respondent)
SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Commission (NSW) (Appellant) Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): DC 06/61/0011
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