NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Mohamed v R [2008] NSWCCA 45
HEARING DATE(S): 11 February 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 5 March 2008
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; Grove J at 37; Simpson J at 38
DECISION: Appeal dismissed
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction - aggravated kidnapping and robbery in company - joint indictment of three co-accused - co-accused found not guilty - whether verdicts inconsistent - signifcantly different roles assumed by co-accused - whether verdict for robbery in company charge was unreasonable - whether jury should be directed in relation to alternative non-aggravated count - whether trial judge required to summarise all evidence for jury in summing-up
Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555 McKenzie v The Queen (1996) 190 CLR 348 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606 Pemble v The Queen (1971) 124 CLR 107 CASES CITED : R v BJB [2005] NSWCCA 441 R v Davis [1999] NSWCCA 15 R v King (2004) 59 NSWLR 515 R v Tubou [2001] NSWCCA 243 R v Williams (1999) 104 A Crim R 260 R v Zorad (1990) 19 NSWLR 91
TEXTS CITED: Who is telling the truth? Psychology, common sense and the law (2006) ALJ 655
PARTIES: Elyas Mohamed (Appellant) The Crown
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/2931
COUNSEL: G D Wendler (Appellant) N Adams (Crown)
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