Regina v Taufua [1999] NSWCCA 205

Regina v Taufua [1999] NSWCCA 205

The trial judge erred in giving a Jones v Dunkel direction in favour of the Crown concerning both Price and Brien. Price was an asserted accomplice and there were complex considerations, including his alleged conflicting statements and potential unreliability, which made it inappropriate to leave to the jury whether the applicant should have called him. Brien was introduced by the Crown through evidence of alleged admissions, the defence did not advance an affirmative case requiring him, and expecting the applicant to call him would have inverted the onus of proof. The proper course was to direct the jury not to speculate about what Price or Brien might have said and to decide the case on...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal After District Court Re Trial Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal out of time granted; appeal upheld; conviction and sentence quashed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['armed Robbery' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'jones V Dunkel Direction' 'failure to Call Witnesses' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'new Trial']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['armed Robbery' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'jones V Dunkel Direction' 'failure to Call Witnesses' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'new Trial']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal After District Court Re Trial Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury that it could infer from the applicant's failure to call Dean Price and David Brien that their evidence would not have advanced the applicant's case." 'Whether a Jones v Dunkel direction should have been given against the applicant, against the Crown, or not at all concerning the non-calling of Price and Brien.' 'Whether the erroneous directions may have resulted in a miscarriage of justice and whether a new trial should be ordered.']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in giving a Jones v Dunkel direction in favour of the Crown concerning both Price and Brien. Price was an asserted accomplice and there were complex considerations, including his alleged conflicting statements and potential unreliability, which made it inappropriate to leave to the jury whether the applicant should have called him. Brien was introduced by the Crown through evidence of alleged admissions, the defence did not advance an affirmative case requiring him, and expecting the applicant to call him would have inverted the onus of proof. The proper course was to direct the jury not to speculate about what Price or Brien might have said and to decide the case on...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal out of time granted; appeal upheld; conviction and sentence quashed; new trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal out of time be granted.' 'Appeal upheld.' 'Conviction and sentence quashed and a new trial to be held.']