R v Pisciuneri; Pisciuneri v R [2007] NSWCCA 265

R v Pisciuneri; Pisciuneri v R [2007] NSWCCA 265

The conviction appeal failed because, on the whole of the evidence, it was open to the jury to reject the appellant's account and defence expert evidence, accept evidence supporting impact in the eastbound lane and excessive or dangerous driving, and be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant drove in a manner dangerous to another person. The short jury deliberation did not make the verdict unsafe because the jury had heard the evidence over the trial, seen exhibits and the scene, and had shown attentiveness. The Crown sentence appeal failed because no material error was shown in the sentencing judge's fact-finding, the judge's findings were consistent with the verdict, and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction by the Appellant and Crown Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court
Outcome
The appeal against conviction is dismissed. The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['dangerous Driving Occasioning Death' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'jury Consideration of Expert Evidence' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'sentencing Fact Finding']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['dangerous Driving Occasioning Death' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'jury Consideration of Expert Evidence' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'sentencing Fact Finding']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction by the Appellant and Crown Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the guilty verdict for driving in a manner dangerous occasioning death was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.' 'Whether a miscarriage of justice was occasioned by the jury failing to give proper consideration to conflicting expert traffic accident reconstruction evidence.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred in fact-finding after the jury's guilty verdict." 'Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction appeal failed because, on the whole of the evidence, it was open to the jury to reject the appellant's account and defence expert evidence, accept evidence supporting impact in the eastbound lane and excessive or dangerous driving, and be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant drove in a manner dangerous to another person. The short jury deliberation did not make the verdict unsafe because the jury had heard the evidence over the trial, seen exhibits and the scene, and had shown attentiveness. The Crown sentence appeal failed because no material error was shown in the sentencing judge's fact-finding, the judge's findings were consistent with the verdict, and...

Court Disposition

The appeal against conviction is dismissed. The appeal against sentence is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal against conviction is dismissed.' 'The appeal against sentence is dismissed.']