R v Sloan (No. 2) [2022] NSWDC 499

R v Sloan (No. 2) [2022] NSWDC 499

The jury was discharged because the accused proposed to seek interlocutory review under s 5F Criminal Appeal Act 1912, the jury had been empanelled but had heard no evidence, the disruption from discharge would be limited, reasons on the relevant interlocutory issues were to be made available urgently, and the Crown fairly conceded the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application by the Accused to Discharge the Empanelled Jury During Trial, Following Indicated Interlocutory Rulings and a Proposed Application Under S 5 F Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Outcome
Application granted; jury discharged.
Legal Topics
['application for Stay of Proceedings' 'trial by Jury' 'discharge of Whole Jury' 'interlocutory Appeal' 'audio Visual Link Evidence' 'severance' 'tendency Evidence']
['criminal Procedure'] ['application for Stay of Proceedings' 'trial by Jury' 'discharge of Whole Jury' 'interlocutory Appeal' 'audio Visual Link Evidence' 'severance' 'tendency 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 / Application by the Accused to Discharge the Empanelled Jury During Trial, Following Indicated Interlocutory Rulings and a Proposed Application Under S 5 F Criminal Appeal Act 1912

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the empanelled jury should be discharged to allow the accused to consider and, if advised, pursue an application under s 5F Criminal Appeal Act 1912 concerning interlocutory decisions on audio visual link evidence and severance.' 'Whether discharge of the jury would cause limited disruption where the jury had been empanelled but had heard no evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The jury was discharged because the accused proposed to seek interlocutory review under s 5F Criminal Appeal Act 1912, the jury had been empanelled but had heard no evidence, the disruption from discharge would be limited, reasons on the relevant interlocutory issues were to be made available urgently, and the Crown fairly conceded the application.

Court Disposition

Application granted; jury discharged.

Orders

  • ['Grant the application that this jury be discharged.' "The matter is to adjourn until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock to monitor progress and thereafter adjourn day-to-day next week until the Court is in a position to call another panel, select a jury and get the trial under way."]