Poniris v R [2014] NSWCCA 100

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Poniris v R [2014] NSWCCA 100 Hearing dates: 24 March 2014 Decision date: 05 June 2014 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]; Adamson J at [83]; Bellew J at [84] Decision: (1) Refuse leave to the appellant to rely on any of his four grounds of appeal. (2) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against conviction - whether defence counsel implicitly relied upon s 137 Evidence Act at trial - whether trial judge obliged to consider application of s 137 in the absence of reliance on that section - whether leave required pursuant to r 4 Criminal Appeal Rules where objection to admission of evidence is taken on one basis at trial and on a different basis on appeal - leave under r 4 refused - whether trial judge failed to advise jury of limitations on use of the evidence and to properly direct jury on motive to lie Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) Cases Cited: ARS v R [2011] NSWCCA 266 Aytugrul v The Queen [2012] HCA 15; 247 CLR 170 Bin Sulaeman v R [2013] NSWCCA 283 Chand v R [2011] NSWCCA 53 Darwiche v R [2011] NSWCCA 62; 209 A Crim R 424 Dhanhoa v The Queen [2003] HCA 40; 217 CLR 1 Doe v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 203; 187 A Crim R 328 FDP v R [2008] NSWCCA 317; 74 NSWLR 645 Festa v The Queen [2001] HCA 72; 208 CLR 593 Flanagan v R [2013] NSWCCA 320 Gilmour v Environment Protection Authority; Tableland Topdressing Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority [2002] NSWCCA 399; 55 NSWLR 593 James v R [2014] HCA 6; 88 ALJR 427 Kuehne v R [2011] NSWCCA 101 Papakosmas v R [1999] HCA 37; 196 CLR 297 Penza and Di Maria v R [2013] NSWCCA 21 Pemble v R [1971] HCA 20; 124 CLR 107 Potts v R [2012] NSWCCA 229; 227 A Crim R 217 R v BD (1997) 94 A Crim R 131 R v Shamouil [2006] NSWCCA 112; 66 NSWLR 228 Shepherd v R [2011] NSWCCA 245 Steve v R [2008] NSWCCA 231; 189 A Crim R 68 Vickers v R [2006] NSWCCA 60; 160 A Crim R 195 Ward v R [2013] NSWCCA 46 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Christopher Poniris (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: G Brady (Appellant) H Wilson SC (Respondent) Solicitors: Nyman Gibson Stewart (Appellant) Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent) File Number(s): 2009/10676 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9101 Date of Decision: 2012-06-29 00:00:00 Before: Woods DCJ File Number(s): 2009/10676