Logan v R [2015] NSWCCA 116

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Logan v R [2015] NSWCCA 116 Hearing dates: 11 March 2015 Decision date: 27 May 2015 Before: Meagher JA at [1]; Simpson J at [2]; Schmidt J at [29] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted; (2) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: APPEAL - conviction - aggravated assault with intent to rob - whether verdict unreasonable or unsupported by evidence - identification evidence - appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(b) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 191 Cases Cited: M v The Queen [1994] HCA 63; 181 CLR 487 SKA v The Queen [2011] HCA 13; 243 CLR 400 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Tamara Leigh Logan (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: A Webb (Applicant) S Dowling SC (Respondent)

Solicitors: Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Ltd (Applicant) S Kavanagh - Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent) File Number(s): 2011/378495 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: District Court Date of Decision: 15 August 2013 Before: Haesler DCJ File Number(s): 2011/378495

Judgment 1. MEAGHER JA: I agree with Simpson J. 2. SIMPSON J: On 18 February 2013 the applicant was arraigned in the District Court on an indictment containing two counts. The first count was of robbery in company, allegedly committed on 26 November 2011; the second count was of aggravated assault with intent to rob, using corporal violence, alleged to have been committed on the same day. 3. A jury was empanelled and the trial proceeded. On 25 February the jury returned its verdicts. It found the applicant not guilty on the first count, but guilty on the second. 4. Haesler DCJ proceeded to sentence the applicant (to imprisonment for 1 year and 9 months, with a non-parole period of 9 months). 5. The applicant now appeals against the conviction. She has not sought leave to appeal against the sentence imposed. She has identified one ground of appeal only, that: "the verdict of guilty is unreasonable or unable to be supported having regard to the evidence". A ground that the verdict was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence accepts that, as a matter of law, there was evidence to support the conviction, but contends that, as a matter of fact, the evidence was insufficient to rise to proof beyond reasonable doubt. Since the ground involves a question of fact alone, pursuant to s 5(1)(b) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) the applicant requires the leave of the Court to appeal. In my opinion that leave ought to be granted.