R v Warwick (No.39) [2018] NSWSC 1286
Sections 32 and 33 of the Evidence Act 1995 do not apply to the circumstances of Mr Sheather’s evidence-in-chief. The evidence was not led in a manner that invokes these sections. Even if recollection was refreshed prior to giving evidence, this affects weight, not admissibility. Thus, the application to strike out the evidence is dismissed.
- Parties
- Prosecution: The Crown; Accused: Leonard John Warwick
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 August 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Strike Out Evidence in Chief
- Outcome
- Notice of Motion to strike out evidence-in-chief dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Evidence, Refreshing Memory, Evidence in Chief, Application of Evidence Act 1995 S 32 and S 33
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Crown
Prosecution
Leonard John Warwick
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Strike Out Evidence in Chief
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether evidence-in-chief of a former police officer (Mr Jesse Sheather) should be struck out due to alleged reliance on hearsay and failure to comply with Evidence Act 1995, s 32 and s 33.
Ratio Decidendi
Sections 32 and 33 of the Evidence Act 1995 do not apply to the circumstances of Mr Sheather’s evidence-in-chief. The evidence was not led in a manner that invokes these sections. Even if recollection was refreshed prior to giving evidence, this affects weight, not admissibility. Thus, the application to strike out the evidence is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Notice of Motion to strike out evidence-in-chief dismissed.
Orders
- Notice of Motion filed in Court on 16 August 2018 to strike out the evidence-in-chief of Mr Jesse Sheather is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment