R v Smith [No 3] [2011] NSWSC 728

R v Smith [No 3] [2011] NSWSC 728

The application sought to raise a reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence, but as upheld in Doney v The Queen and R v JMR, so long as there is evidence – even if circumstantial – which is capable of supporting a guilty verdict, the matter must be left for the jury, and a directed verdict of acquittal is not warranted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Directed Verdict After Close of Crown Case
Outcome
Application for directed verdict refused
Legal Topics
['directed Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'murder' 'jury Direction']
['criminal Law'] ['directed Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'murder' 'jury Direction']

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 / Interlocutory Application for Directed Verdict After Close of Crown Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the evidence adduced by the Crown was sufficient for the case to be left to the jury' 'Whether a directed verdict of acquittal should be made where the Crown case is circumstantial']

Ratio Decidendi

The application sought to raise a reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence, but as upheld in Doney v The Queen and R v JMR, so long as there is evidence – even if circumstantial – which is capable of supporting a guilty verdict, the matter must be left for the jury, and a directed verdict of acquittal is not warranted.

Court Disposition

Application for directed verdict refused

Orders

  • []