NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v TD [2013] NSWCCA 337 Hearing dates: 11 December 2013 Decision date: 20 December 2013 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]; Simpson J at [2]; Hall J at [50] Decision: (i) The Director's appeal is upheld; (ii) The ruling of the District Court that evidence of the conversations between UCO535 and the respondent not be admitted is vacated. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - solicit to murder EVIDENCE - Crown appeal - Criminal Appeal Act 1912, 5F(3A) - controlled operation - Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 - Authority to conduct controlled operation - nature of controlled activity - undercover police operative - communications with accused recorded pursuant to Authority - whether evidence unlawfully obtained - Evidence Act 1995, s 138 - whether Authority validly granted - whether activity within term of Authority - Code of conduct - evidence not unlawfully obtained - ruling excluding evidence vacated Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Evidence Act 1995 Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Regulation 2007 Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Regulation 2012 Cases Cited: Gedeon v The Commissioner of the NSW Crime Commission [2008] HCA 43; 236 CLR 120 Ridgeway v The Queen [1995] HCA 66; 184 CLR 19 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina (Appellant) TD (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: V Lydiard (Appellant) M Kumar (Commissioner of Police) C Davenport SC/S Bouveng (Respondent) Solicitors: S Kavanagh - Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Appellant) I V Knight - Crown Solicitor (Commissioner of Police) Cater & Blumer (Respondent) File Number(s): 2012/160490 Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 34(2)(b) of the Law Enforcement and National Security (Assumed Identities) Act 2010, that there be no publication or other disclosure of the assumed identity of the undercover operative or of any document or evidence or other information that identifies, or might facilitate the identification of, the assumed identity of the undercover operative, except as is necessary for the proper condcut of the proceedings
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