Darwiche v R; El-Zeyat v R; Aouad v R; Osman v R [2011] NSWCCA 62

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Darwiche v R; El-Zeyat v R; Aouad v R; Osman v R [2011] NSWCCA 62 Hearing dates: 29 June 2010, 30 June 2010, 1 July 2010, 2 July 2010, 22 March 2011 Decision date: 08 April 2011 Before: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; James J at 2 Johnson J at 3 Decision: 1. In the appeal of Adnan Darwiche, the orders of the Court are: (a) extend time for filing of a Notice of Appeal; (b) refuse leave to add Proposed Grounds 11, 12 and 13; (c) appeal against conviction dismissed. 2. In the appeal of Ramzi Aouad, the appeal against conviction be dismissed. 3. In the appeal of Nasaem El-Zeyat, the orders of the Court are: (a) refuse leave to add Proposed Grounds 7 and 8; (b) appeal against conviction dismissed. 4. In the appeal of Abass Osman, the orders of the Court are: (a) extend time for filing of a Notice of Appeal; (b) appeal against conviction dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - conviction appeals - joint trials of Appellants - all Appellants convicted of two murders (Lawford Street shooting) - firearm attack on suburban house from street - two occupants (Ziad Razzak and Mervat Nemra) killed - joint criminal enterprise - alleged to be part of feud between two groups - one Appellant (Darwiche) convicted at same trial of earlier offences of maliciously discharge loaded firearm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (to Bilal Razzak) and shoot at a person (Farouk Razzak) with intent to murder (Yanderra Street shooting) - these offences also alleged to be part of feud - jury unable to agree upon verdict on further count against Darwiche of murder (of Ali Abdul Razzak) APPEAL - grounds by all Appellants claiming prejudice and a miscarriage of justice flowing from joint trial - no error in decision to hold joint trial of all Appellants for Lawford Street shootings - no error in decision to try Darwiche in same joint trial for earlier alleged shooting offences said to be part of feud - appropriate directions given to jury concerning use of evidence against each Appellant - jury reached verdicts impartially on evidence and in accordance with trial judge's directions - no miscarriage of justice resulting from joint trial APPEAL - grounds challenging direction that evidence of one indemnified witness could support evidence of another indemnified witness - no error in direction APPEAL - claim by Darwiche that it was abuse of process for prosecution case to be based upon evidence of indemnified witnesses who received benefits - no application made at trial for stay on this basis - no proper basis for stay in any event - assessment of credibility and reliability of witnesses part of jury's function - all evidence concerning indemnities and benefits placed before the jury - no miscarriage of justice APPEAL - grounds contending error in various respects during trial - no error demonstrated - no miscarriage of justice APPEAL - applications by two Appellants (Darwiche and El-Zeyat) for leave to add further grounds of appeal after hearing of appeal but before judgment delivered - suggested fresh evidence - approach to determination of application for leave - assessment of suggested fresh evidence - whether fresh and credible - whether likely in the context of the trial to cause jury to entertain a reasonable doubt about guilt of Darwiche or El-Zeyat - no miscarriage of justice - leave to add grounds refused Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 Criminal Appeal Rules Cases Cited: R v Darwiche and Ors [2006] NSWSC 1167 R v Lawrence (1980) 1 NSWLR 122 R v Gregory [2002] NSWCCA 199 R v Unger [1977] 2 NSWLR McCall v R [2010] NSWCCA 174 R v Moti [2009] QSC 407; 235 FLR 320 R v Moti [2010] QCA 178; 240 FLR 218 Rozenes v Beljajev [1995] 1 VR 533 R v Abusafiah (1991) 24 NSWLR 531 R v Fuge [2001] NSWCCA 208; 123 A Crim R 310 Ilioski v R [2006] NSWCCA 164 Fingleton v The Queen [2005] HCA 34; 227 CLR 166 Jago v District Court of NSW [1989] HCA 46; 168 CLR 23 R v WRC [2003] NSWCCA 394; 59 NSWLR 273 at 282 Dupas v The Queen [2010] HCA 20; 241 CLR 237 Williams v Spautz [1992] HCA 34; 174 CLR 509 Walton v Gardiner [1993] HCA 77; 177 CLR 378 R (Cth) v Petroulias (No. 9) [2007] NSWSC 84 Doney v The Queen [1990] HCA 51; 171 CLR 207 R v Birks (1990) 19 NSWLR 677 R v Darwiche and Ors [2006] NSWSC 929 Osman v R [2006] NSWCCA 196 R v Guldur (1986) 8 NSWLR 12 De Jesus v The Queen [1986] HCA 65; 61 ALJR 1 R v Pham [2004] NSWCCA 190 Makarov v R (No. 3) [2008] NSWCCA 293 Demirok v The Queen [1977] HCA 21; 137 CLR 20 R v Leaman (1987) 28 A Crim R 104 R v Connell (No. 1) (1992) 8 WAR 518 Yeo v R [2005] NSWCCA 49 Crofts v The Queen [1996] HCA 22; 186 CLR 427 Fittock v The Queen [2003] HCA 9; 217 CLR 508 Gilbert v The Queen [2000] HCA 15; 201 CLR 414 R v Toki (No. 3) [2000] NSWSC 999; 116 A Crim R 536 Papakosmas v The Queen [1999] HCA 37; 196 CLR 297 R v Wilson [2005] NSWCCA 20; 62 NSWLR 346 Aouad v R; El-Zeyat v R [2011] NSWCCA 61 Kanaan v R [2006] NSWCCA 109 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; 101 CLR 298 Steve v R [2008] NSWCCA 231; 189 A Crim R 68 Mahmood v State of Western Australia [2008] HCA 1; 232 CLR 397 Louizos v R [2009] NSWCCA 71; 194 A Crim R 223 FDP v R [2008] NSWCCA 317; 192 A Crim R 87 Wing Cheong Li v R [2010] NSWCCA 40 El Hassan v R [2007] NSWCCA 148 El Jalkh v R [2009] NSWCCA 139 R v Lowery and King (No. 3) [1972] VR 939 Domican v The Queen [1992] HCA 13; 173 CLR 555 R v Rose [2002] NSWCCA 455; 55 NSWLR 701 R v Davidson [2009] NSWCCA 150; 75 NSWLR 150 R v Plevac [1999] NSWCCA 351 R v Fowler [2000] NSWCCA 142 Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Limited [No. 1] [1981] HCA 20; 147 CLR 246 Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT) [2003] HCA 28; 214 CLR 318 Burrell v The Queen [2008] HCA 34; 238 CLR 218 Nguyen v R [2008] NSWCCA 322 R v Abou-Chabake [2004] NSWCCA 356; 149 A Crim R 417 R v Busby (1982) 75 Cr App R 79 R v Beattie [1996] 40 NSWLR 155 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Adnan Darwiche (Appellant) Nasaem El-Zeyat (Appellant) Ramzi Aouad (Appellant) Abass Osman (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr P Lange (Appellant Darwiche) Mr MC Ramage QC; Mr IS McLachlan (Appellant El-Zeyat) Mr P Hamill SC; Mr CJG Smith (Appellant Aouad) Ms A Francis (Appellant Osman) Ms DML Woodburne SC; Ms JA Girdham (Respondent) Solicitors: Lawyers Corp Pty Limited (Appellant Darwiche) Nedim Lawyers (Appellant El-Zeyat) George Sten & Co (Appellant Aouad) Bannister Kyriacou Nasser Lawyers (Appellant Osman) Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent) File Number(s): Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9111 Date of Decision: 2006-11-10 00:00:00 Before: Bell J and a jury File Number(s): 2006/5282 (Appellant Darwiche) 2005/2620 (Appellant El-Zeyat) 2005/2678 (Appellant Aouad) 2005/2957 (Appellant Osman)