Penza and Di Maria v Regina [2013] NSWCCA 21

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Penza and Di Maria v Regina [2013] NSWCCA 21 Hearing dates: 29 November 2012 Decision date: 15 February 2013 Before: Hoeben JA at [1] S Campbell J at [203] Button J at [227] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted. (2) Appeal allowed. (3) The verdicts of guilty, entered on 30 July 2009 in respect of both appellants, should be quashed and in lieu thereof there should be entered a verdict of acquittal in favour of both appellants. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - conviction appeal - murder - known drug dealer shot in his home - Crown case put on basis of extended joint criminal enterprise and constructive murder - essential part of Crown case that appellants were armed when arrived at deceased's home - Crown case based on circumstantial evidence - whether verdict unreasonable and not able to be supported having regard to the evidence - detailed examination of nature and effect of evidence in Crown case - implicit rejection of evidence of appellants - whether correct direction given to jury in respect of felony murder, i.e. that the act causing death had to be voluntary - whether manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act should have been left for the jury's consideration - whether trial judge erred by directing the jury that they could engage in consciousness of guilt reasoning - EVIDENCE - whether evidence relied on by Crown to establish consciousness of guilt was admissible - s 137 Evidence Act 1995 - was trial judge obliged to reject evidence pursuant to s 137 if no objection taken - Crown bound by way case put at trial - Crown not entitled to change case on appeal from that presented at trial - Guilty verdicts to be quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered. Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 - ss 5(a), 5(b), 6(1) Criminal Appeal Rules Cases Cited: Blackwell v Regina [2011] NSWCCA 93; 208 A Crim 5 392 Carney v R; Cambey v R [2011] NSWCCA 223 Chamberlain v The Queen [No 2] [1984] HCA 7; 153 CLR 521 Crampton v The Queen [2000] HCA 60; 206 CLR 161 Douglass v The Queen [2012] HCA 34; 86 ALJR 1086 Edwards v The Queen [1993] HCA 63; 178 CLR 193 FDP v R [2008] NSWCCA 317; 74 NSWLR 645 Fingleton v The Queen (2005) 227 CLR 166 Gillard v R [2003] HCA 64; 219 CLR 1 Griffiths v R [1994] HCA 55; 69 ALJR 77 Hem Chand v R [2011] NSWCCA 53 Knight v R [1992] HCA 56; 175 CLR 495 Liftronic Pty Ltd v Unver [2001] HCA 24; 75 ALJR 867 M v R [1994] HCA 63; 181 CLR 487 MFA v R [2002] HCA 53; 213 CLR 606 Martinez v WA [2007] A Crim R 389 Murray v R [2002] HCA 26; 211 CLR 193 Pemble v The Queen [1971] HCA 20; 124 CLR 107 Plomp v The Queen [1963] HCA 44; 110 CLR 234 R v Abusafiah [1991] NSWCCA 542; 21 NSWLR 531 at 536) R v Ciantar [2006] 16 VR 26 R v Cook [2004] NSWCCA 52 R v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; 228 CLR 618 R v Kanaan [2005] NSWCCA 385; 64 NSWLR 527 R v Penza and Di Maria [2010] NSWSC] 16 R v Wilson [2005] NSWCCA 20; 62 NSWLR 346 Royall v The Queen [1991] HCA 27; 172 CLR 378 Ryan v R [1967] HCA 2; 121 CLR 205 SKA v R [2011] HCA 13; 243 CLR 400 Shepherd v R [2011] NSWCCA 245 Steve v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 213; (2009) 189 A Crim R 68 Suttor v Gundowda Pty Ltd (1950) 81 CLR 418 University of Wollongong v Metwally [No. 2] [1985] HCA 28; 59 ALJR 481 Velevski v The Queen [2002] HCA 4; (2002) 186 ALR 233 at [192], Category: Principal judgment Parties: Franco Michael Penza - Appellant Joshua Di Maria - Appellant Regina - Respondent Crown Representation: Counsel: Mr E Ozen - Appellant Penza Mr T Game SC/Mr S Buchen - Appellant Di Maria Solicitors: Leo Premutico - Appellant Penza B Sandland, Legal Aid NSW - Appellant Di Maria S Kavanagh, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions - Respondent Crown File Number(s): 2008/20054 2008/20055 Decision under appeal Citation: R v Penza and Di Maria [2010] NSWSC] 16 Date of Decision: 2009-07-30 00:00:00 Before: Latham J File Number(s): 2008/20054 2008/20055