NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Buckley v R; R v Buckley [2012] NSWCCA 85 Hearing dates: 17 April 2012 Decision date: 07 May 2012 Before: Basten JA at 1; Blanch J at 51; Beech-Jones at 52 Decision: (1) Refuse the offender leave under r 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules to raise grounds challenging the summing up to the jury, in circumstances where no objection had been taken at trial. (2) Refuse the offender leave to appeal against his convictions. (3) Dismiss the Director's appeal against the inadequacy of the sentences imposed for the offences of dangerous navigation causing death. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - conviction - offences of aggravated dangerous navigation occasioning death - whether trial judge erred in presentation of evidence during summing up to jury - failure to summarise evidence by reference to issues - whether leave to appeal should be granted - R v Zorad (1990) 19 NSWLR 91 distinguished; El-Jalkh v R [2009] NSWCCA 139; RR v R [2011] NSWCCA 235 applied - Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 161
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - sentence - offences of aggravated dangerous navigation occasioning death - whether manifestly inadequate - whether trial judge failed to assess adequately the moral culpability of the defendant - whether trial judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence - whether manifest error
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - sentence - offences of aggravated dangerous navigation occasioning death - application of guideline judgments - R v Reynolds; R v Small [2010] NSWSC 691; R v Whyte [2002] NSWCCA 343; 55 NSWLR 252 applied Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 405AA Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 5D Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 161 Cases Cited: El-Jalkh v R [2009] NSWCCA 139 Picken v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 319 R v Jurisic (1998) 45 NSWLR 209 RR v R [2011] NSWCCA 235 R v Reynolds; R v Small [2010] NSWSC 691 R v Tillott (NSWCCA, 8 April 1991, unreported) R v Whyte [2002] NSWCCA 343; 55 NSWLR 252 R v Zorad (1990) 19 NSWLR 91 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Sean Kenneth Buckley - Appellant Crown - Respondent Representation: Counsel:
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