R v Warwick (No.39) [2018] NSWSC 1286

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

Leonard John Warwick

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Strike Out Evidence in Chief

  1. 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.