DN v R [2016] NSWCCA 252

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: DN v R [2016] NSWCCA 252 Hearing dates: 2 September 2016 Decision date: 10 November 2016 Before: Beazley P at [1]; Davies J at [113]; Garling J at [114] Decision: 1. Grant leave to appeal against conviction;

2. Appeal against conviction dismissed;

3. Grant leave to appeal against sentence;

4. Appeal against sentence dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against conviction – whether leave to appeal should be granted – directions to jury – consciousness of guilt reasoning – post-offence conduct – destruction or disposal of evidence – whether trial judge erred in failing to direct jury in relation to consciousness of guilt – whether the evidence could rationally support an inference of guilt – whether failure to direct occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – whether leave to appeal should be granted – objective seriousness of the offence – age of complainant as an aggravating factor – whether sentence manifestly excessive Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Rules Cases Cited: AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111; [1999] HCA 46 ARS v R [2011] NSWCCA 266 Darkan v The Queen (2006) 227 CLR 373; [2006] HCA 34 Edwards v R (1998) 178 CLR 193; [1993] HCA 63 Filippou v The Queen (2015) 256 CLR 47; [2015] HCA 29 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Ibbs v The Queen (1987) 163 CLR 447; [1987] HCA 46 Kuehne v R; Humphries M v R; Humphries A v R [2012] NSWCCA 270 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 McKey v R (2012) 219 A Crim R 227; [2012] NSWCCA 1 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 Papakosmas v The Queen (1999) 196 CLR 297; [1999] HCA 37 R v Ciantar; DPP v Ciantar (2006) 167 A Crim R; [2006] VSCA 263 R v Cook [2004] NSWCCA 52 R v GJH (2001) 122 A Crim R 361; [2001] NSWCCA 128 R v Hibberd (2009) 194 A Crim R 1; [2009] NSWCCA 20 R v KNL (2005) 154 A Crim R 268; [2005] NSWCCA 260 Weiss v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 300; [2005] HCA 81 Zoneff v the Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234; [2000] HCA 28 Category: Principal judgment Parties: DN (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T Gartelmann SC (Appellant) S Dowling SC (Respondent)