REGINA v Ross Allan LAMERI REGINA v Phillip Barry COHEN [2004] NSWCCA 217

REGINA v Ross Allan LAMERI REGINA v Phillip Barry COHEN [2004] NSWCCA 217

The excluded evidence about Cohen's instructions to Meyer and the dealings with the cheques was clearly relevant to proving that Meyer was acting with or on behalf of the accused and to proving dishonesty, including Cohen's knowledge of the false M & C invoices. Its probative value was not shown to be outweighed by unfair prejudice, and its exclusion substantially weakened the prosecution case. The appeal was therefore allowed and the District Court ruling vacated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Under S 5 F(3 A) of the Criminal Appeal Act Against a Ruling on the Admissibility of Evidence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal After the District Court Trial Had Commenced, the Jury Had Been Empanelled, and Before the Crown Opening
Outcome
Appeal allowed; the District Court ruling excluding the evidence was vacated.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Evidentiary Ruling' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'relevance' 'unfair Prejudice' 'obtaining a Valuable Thing by Deception' 'money Laundering' 'subsequent Conduct Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeal Against Evidentiary Ruling' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'relevance' 'unfair Prejudice' 'obtaining a Valuable Thing by Deception' 'money Laundering' 'subsequent Conduct Evidence']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Under S 5 F(3 A) of the Criminal Appeal Act Against a Ruling on the Admissibility of Evidence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal After the District Court Trial Had Commenced, the Jury Had Been Empanelled, and Before the Crown Opening

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court ruling excluding evidence about dealings with cheques after they were obtained was wrong' 'Whether the excluded evidence was relevant to the offences charged' 'Whether the probative value of the evidence was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice under s 137 of the Evidence Act' "Whether the ruling eliminated or substantially weakened the prosecution's case for the purposes of s 5F(3A) of the Criminal Appeal Act"]

Ratio Decidendi

The excluded evidence about Cohen's instructions to Meyer and the dealings with the cheques was clearly relevant to proving that Meyer was acting with or on behalf of the accused and to proving dishonesty, including Cohen's knowledge of the false M & C invoices. Its probative value was not shown to be outweighed by unfair prejudice, and its exclusion substantially weakened the prosecution case. The appeal was therefore allowed and the District Court ruling vacated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; the District Court ruling excluding the evidence was vacated.

Orders

  • ['Appeal upheld' 'The ruling of Judge Payne was vacated']