NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Shoesmith [2013] NSWCCA 127 Hearing dates: 22 April 2013 Decision date: 24 May 2013 Before: Price J at [1] Davies J at [68] Barr AJ at [69] Decision: 1. Appeal upheld and the conviction is quashed. 2. Order the entry of a verdict of acquittal. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - armed robbery - trial directions - alibi - voice recognition -unreasonableness of verdict Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 s 33B(b), s 97(2) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 s 6(1) Cases Cited: M v The Queen [1994] HCA 63; (1994) 181 CLR 487 MFA v The Queen [2002] HCA 53; (2002) 213 CLR 606 Morris v The Queen [1987] HCA 50; (1987) 163 CLR 454 R v Kanaan [2005] NSWCCA 385; (2005) 64 NSWLR 527 R v Small (1994) 33 NSWLR 575 Rasic v R [2009] NSWCCA 202 Raumakita v R [2011] NSWCCA 126; (2011) 210 A Crim R 326 SKA v The Queen [2011] HCA 13; (2011) 85 ALJR 571 The Queen v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; (2007) 228 CLR 618 The Queen v Keenan [2009] HCA 1; (2009) 236 CLR 397 The Queen v Nguyen [2010] HCA 38; (2010) 85 ALJR 8 Category: Principal judgment Parties: David Shoesmith (Applicant) Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr M Smith (Applicant) Ms J A Girdham (Respondent) Solicitors: CrimLaw NSW (Applicant) Mr S Kavanagh (Respondent) File Number(s): 2011/66874 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9101 Date of Decision: 2012-03-21 00:00:00 Before: Delaney DCJ File Number(s): 2011/66874 2011/66999
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