NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Chime v R [2014] NSWCCA 304 Hearing dates: 6 August 2014 Decision date: 17 December 2014 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1] Adams J at [2] R A Hulme J at [104] Decision: 1.Appeal against conviction dismissed; 2.Leave to appeal against sentence granted; 3.Appeal against sentence dismissed except as to the sentence imposed in respect of count 6. 4.The sentence imposed in respect of count 6 quashed and, in lieu thereof, a sentence of 2 years to be imposed commencing on 29 February 2012 and ending on 28 February 2014. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - appeal against conviction - whether trial judge directed jury to find that offender was person in photographic evidence - whether juror fell asleep during trial - whether facilities for jury deliberation induced poor judgment - whether jury induced to give verdict before prepared to do so - whether trial judge erred in directing offender to answer questions in English - effect of interpreter falling asleep during trial - whether offender's legal representative mistaken or negligent in failing to call witnesses - whether absence of certain evidence occasioned miscarriage of justice
CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - appeal from sentence - whether sentence manifestly excessive - whether inappropriate weight accorded to offender's psychological condition - whether offender's status as first-time offender accorded adequate weight - whether sentencing judge failed to consider offender's mental health history and family circumstances Legislation Cited: Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 307.2(1), 11.2(1), 400.4(1) Cases Cited: Gallagher v The Queen (1986) 160 CLR 392 Mickelberg v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 259 R v Abou-Chabake [2004] NSWCCA 356; 149 A Crim R 417 Salmon v R [2012] NSWCCA 119 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Uchenna Jude Chime (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I D Bourke SC (Respondent) Solicitors: Self-represented (Applicant) Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) (Respondent) File Number(s): 2011/161270; 2011/166427 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9101 Date of Decision: 2012-07-18 00:00:00 Before: Tupman DCJ File Number(s): 2011/161270; 2011/166427
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