Davis v R [2018] NSWCCA 277

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Davis v R [2018] NSWCCA 277 Hearing dates: 29 October 2018 Decision date: 30 November 2018 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]; Harrison J at [219]; Schmidt J at [224] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal against conviction is granted. (2) The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – conviction appeal – two counts of murder and one count of administering a poison with intent to murder – insulin injections to three elderly residents of an aged care facility – circumstantial case – judge alone trial – whether evidence wrongly admitted for a coincidence purpose – whether coincidence evidence was erroneously used in "backwards reasoning" – whether verdicts were unreasonable and not supported by the evidence – challenge to finding that the same person committed all three offences – whether evidence established a timeframe within which insulin was injected – whether totality of circumstances established guilt of applicant beyond reasonable doubt – leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – ss 18, 27 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – ss 5(1), 6(1) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – ss 55, 56, 97, 98, 100(2), 101(2) Cases Cited: Bell v R [2017] NSWCCA 207 Dickson v R [2017] NSWCCA 78 DSJ v R; NS v R [2012] NSWCCA 9; 259 FLR 262 El Hassan v R [2007] NSWCCA 148 Filippou v The Queen [2015] HCA 29; 256 CLR 47 Folbigg v R [2005] NSWCCA 23; 152 A Crim R 35 Gilham v R [2012] NSWCCA 131 Haines v R [2018] NSWCCA 11 Hughes v The Queen [2017] HCA 20; 92 ALJR 52 IMM v The Queen [2016] HCA 14; 257 CLR 300 Lane v R [2013] NSWCCA 317 Libke v The Queen [2007] HCA 30; 230 CLR 559 Perish, Anthony v R; Perish, Andrew v R; Lawton, Matthew v R [2016] NSWCCA 89 R v Ceissman [2010] NSWCCA 50 R v Davis [2016] NSWSC 1362 R v Gale; R v Duckworth [2012] NSWCCA 174; 217 A Crim R 487 R v Hillier [2007] HCA 13, 228 CLR 618 R v Merritt [1999] NSWCCA 29 R v MR [2013] NSWCCA 236 R v RN [2005] NSWCCA 413 Shepherd v R [1990] HCA 56; 170 CLR 573 SKA v The Queen [2011] HCA 13; 243 CLR The Queen v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35; 258 CLR 308 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Garry Steven Davis – Applicant Regina – Respondent Crown Representation: Counsel: G Turnbull SC/A Cook – Applicant T Smith – Respondent Crown