NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Sever v R [2010] NSWCCA 135
HEARING DATE(S): 16 March 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 25 June 2010
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJatCL at 1; Latham J at 142; Schmidt J at 151
DECISION: The appellant's conviction quashed and a verdict of acquittal entered.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction - whether trial judge fell into error in permitting the jury to consider alternative case of joint criminal enterprise - whether trial judge erred in his directions as to joint criminal enterprise - jury likely to have convicted appellant on the basis of joint criminal enterprise - absence of evidence to hypothesise that another person involved in the offence - trial judge not in error by allowing the issue to go to the jury - CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction - whether verdict unreasonable and incapable of being supported by the evidence - verdict not open on the evidence
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Appeal Act 1912
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Barca v R (1975) 133 CLR 82 Beatson v R [2009] NSWCCA 288 Burrell v R [2007] NSWCCA 65 Carney v R [2008] NSWCCA 140 Chow v R (2007) 172 A Crim R 582; [2007] NSWCCA 225 Cittadini v R [2009] NSWCCA 302) Dodds v R [2009] NSWCCA 78 Doney v R (1990) 171 CLR 207; (1990) 96 ALR 539 Fernando v R [2008] NSWCCA 97 Haoui v R (2008) 188 A Crim R 331; [2008] NSWCCA 209 Jones v R (1997) 191 CLR 439 Knight v R (1992) 175 CLR 495 M v R (1994) 181 CLR 487 McLeod v R [2008] NSWCCA 127 MFA v R (2002) 213 CLR 606. Norris v R (2007) 176 A Crim R 42; [2007] NSWCCA 235 Osland v The Queen [1998] HCA 75 at [27], [93] ; (1998) 197 CLR 316 CASES CITED : Peacock v R (1911) 13 CLR 619 Penney v R (1998) 155 ALR 605; [1998] HCA 51 Plomp v R (1963) 110 CLR 234 R v Docker [2005] NSWCCA 425 R v Habib [2005] NSWCCA 223 R v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; (2007) 228 CLR 618 R v JMR (1991) 57 A Crim R 39 R v Le [2002] NSWCCA 193; (2002) 130 A Crim R 256 R v PL [2009] NSWCCA 256; (2009) 261 ALR 365 R v Prochilo [2003] NSWCCA 265 R v R (1989) 18 NSWLR 74; (1989) 44 A Crim R 404 R v Tangye (1997) 92 A Crim R 545 Sgardelis v R [2006] NSWCCA 338 Shepherd v R [1990] HCA 56; (1990) 170 CLR 573 Tekely v R; Nagle v R [2007] NSWCCA 75 Thomas v R (1960) 102 CLR 584 Thornton v R [2007] NSWCCA 164 TK v R [2009] NSWCCA 151
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