NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Sudath v R [2008] NSWCCA 207 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 18 July 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 September 2008
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; Hidden J at 79; Fullerton J at 80
1. Appeal against conviction dismissed DECISION: 2. Leave to appeal sentence granted 3. Appeal against sentence dismissed
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal against conviction – Common assault – Sexual assault – Domestic violence – Prescribed sexual offence proceedings – Whether judge erred in allowing alternative arrangements for giving of evidence by complainant – Whether judge erred in declining to give a direction on circumstantial evidence – Whether verdict of jury unreasonable in the circumstances – Whether fresh evidence obtained after proceedings evinced a miscarriage of justice – CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal against sentence – Whether sentence in respect of common assault count excessive – Whether accumulation of sentences inappropriate considering Pearce v R
Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Craig v The King (1933) 49 CLR 429 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 at 504-505 CASES CITED : Pearce v R [1998] HCA 57; (1998) 194 CLR 610 Plomp v The Queen (1963) 110 CLR 234 R v Taouk [2005] NSWCCA 155; (2005) 154 A Crim R 69
PARTIES: Kondasinghe Aron Sudath (Appellant) The Crown
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/2978
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