NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision: 199 A Crim R 419
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Li, Wing Cheong v R [2010] NSWCCA 40
HEARING DATE(S): 10/12/2009
JUDGMENT DATE: 8 March 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Macfarlan JA at 1; Howie J at 2; Hall J at 2
DECISION: The appeal is dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Conviction appeal - Money Laundering - EVIDENCE - whether telephone conversations between persons not charged with offence hearsay - whether evidence should have been excluded under s 137 of Evidence Act - SUMMING UP - whether directions as to use to be made of telephone calls adequate - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - whether Crown's address to jury prejudicial - SUMMING UP - whether Judge erred in directions given concerning Crown's address - whether directions on character adequate - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - whether misconduct bu jury caused miscarriage of justice - juror playing word game in court room
Judiciary Act (Cth) - s 78B Criminal Code (Cth) - ss 135, 400.3(1), 400.3(4) LEGISLATION CITED: Evidence Act 1995 - ss 59(1), 135, 137 Jury Act 1977 - s 53A, 73A, Part 9 Criminal Appeal Rules - Rule 4
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Papakosmas v The Queen [1999] HCA 37; (1999) 1996 CLR 297 Walton v The Queen [1989] HCA 9; (1988-1989) CLR 283 CASES CITED : Pollitt v The Queen [1992] HCA 35; (1992) 35; (1992) 174 CLR 558 Regina v Lee [1998] HCA 60; (1998) 195 CLR 594 Burrell v R [2007] NSWCCA 65 Cesan v The Queen [2008] HCA 52; (2008) 236 CLR 358
TEXTS CITED: Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book
PARTIES: Wing Cheong LI v Regina
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