R v Burton [2013] NSWCCA 335

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Burton [2013] NSWCCA 335 Hearing dates: 31 October 2013 Decision date: 20 December 2013 Before: Simpson J at [1]; R A Hulme J at [219]; Barr AJ at [220] Decision: (i) Crown appeal allowed; (ii) The ruling that evidence of the telephone conversation between the complainant and the respondent on 12 June 2012 be excluded is vacated; (iii) The ruling that evidence of the complainant's prior sexual experience be admitted pursuant to s 293(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 is vacated. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - Crown appeal - Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s 5F(3A) - accused charged with sexual intercourse without consent - Crimes Act 1900, s 61I - pre-trial evidentiary rulings - Criminal Procedure Act 1986, s 293(4)(a) - evidence of complainant's sexual interest in a man other than accused - evidence irrelevant - whether tendency evidence - whether evidence of sexual experience or sexual activity - whether at or about time of commission of offence charged - evidence inadmissible EVIDENCE - evidence of telephone conversation recorded pursuant to warrant - admissions - Evidence Act, s 90 - whether unfair to admit evidence - whether complainant acting as "agent of the State" - whether unfair derogation of accused's right to exercise free choice to speak or be silent - whether conversation "functional equivalent of an interrogation" - "eliciting behaviour" - whether admissions made voluntarily EVIDENCE - Evidence Act, s 137 - probative value of evidence - whether existence of alternative explanation relevant to assessment of probative value - facts in issue - Evidence Act s 137 contrasted with Evidence Act s 98 - whether credibility, reliability or weight of evidence relevant to assessment of probative value - Crown appeal allowed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Evidence Act 1995 Surveillance Devices Act 2007 Cases Cited: Cleland v The Queen [1982] HCA 67; 151 CLR 1 DAO v R [2011] NSWCCA 63; 81 NSWLR 568 Doney v The Queen [1990] HCA 51; 171 CLR 207 DSJ v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth); NS v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) [2012] NSWCCA 9; 215 A Crim R 349 Dupas v The Queen [2012] VSCA 328; 218 A Crim R 507 McDermott v The King [1948] HCA 23; 76 CLR 501 R v BD (1997) 94 A Crim R 131 R v Bozatsis; R v Spanakakis (1997) 97 A Crim R 296 R v Broyles [1991] 3 SCR 595 R v Carusi (1997) 92 A Crim R 52 R v Christie [1914] AC 545 R v Cook [2004] NSWCCA 52 R v Edelsten (1989) 18 NSWLR 213 R v Fletcher [2005] NSWCCA 338; 156 A Crim R 308 R v Hebert [1990] 2 SCR 151 R v Lansdell (NSWCCA, 22 May 1995, unreported) R v Morgan (1993) NSWLR 543 R v Murray (1987) 11 NSWLR 12 R v Nguyen, John Viet; R v Nguyen, Anthony Si [2010] NSWCCA 97 R v Pavitt [2007] NSWCCA 88; 69 A Crim R 452 R v Powch (1988) 14 NSWLR 136 R v Shamouil [2006] NSWCCA 112; 66 NSWLR 228 R v Singh-Bal (1997) 92 A Crim R 397 R v SJRC [2007] NSWCCA 142 R v Steffan (1993) 30 NSWLR 633 R v Suman Sood [2007] NSWCCA 214 R v XY [2012] NSWCCA 121 R v Yates [2002] NSWCCA 520 R v Zhang [2005] NSWCCA 437; 158 A Crim R 504 Smith v The Queen [2001] HCA 50; 206 CLR 650 The Queen v Swaffield; Pavic v The Queen [1998] HCA 1; 192 CLR 159 Wendo v The Queen [1963] HCA 19; 109 CLR 559 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina (Appellant) Brian Sydney Burton (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: N Adams SC/J E Davidson (Appellant) H Dhanji SC/I S McLachlan (Respondent) Solicitors: S Kavanagh - Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Appellant) Mark Ireland (Respondent) File Number(s): 2012/188085 Decision under appeal Before: Graham ADCJ File Number(s): 2012/188085