R v Karimi; R v Khoury; R v Mir (No. 1) [2013] NSWSC 156

R v Karimi; R v Khoury; R v Mir (No. 1) [2013] NSWSC 156

Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 satisfied s.29(1) because Count 1 was part of the alleged series of home-invasion-related offences involving the same group, and Counts 9, 10 and 11 had direct links to persons, weapons and evidence relevant to the earlier counts. The evidence was not merely tendency or propensity evidence and was capable of bearing on links between the accused, weapons and offences and on Karimi's state of mind. The interests of justice did not require separate hearings because appropriate jury directions could address the different counts and any risk of prejudice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding on Indictment / Notice of Motion by Karimi for Severance of Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 and a Separate Trial
Outcome
Application refused; Notice of Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
['joinder of Offences' 'severance of Counts' 'separate Trial' 'criminal Procedure Act 1986 S.29' 'interests of Justice']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['joinder of Offences' 'severance of Counts' 'separate Trial' 'criminal Procedure Act 1986 S.29' 'interests of Justice']

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 Proceeding on Indictment / Notice of Motion by Karimi for Severance of Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 and a Separate Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 should be severed from the amended indictment against Karimi.' 'Whether the offences arise out of the same set of circumstances or form, or are part of, a series of offences of the same or a similar character under s.29 Criminal Procedure Act 1986.' 'Whether the interests of justice require Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 to be heard and determined separately.']

Ratio Decidendi

Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 satisfied s.29(1) because Count 1 was part of the alleged series of home-invasion-related offences involving the same group, and Counts 9, 10 and 11 had direct links to persons, weapons and evidence relevant to the earlier counts. The evidence was not merely tendency or propensity evidence and was capable of bearing on links between the accused, weapons and offences and on Karimi's state of mind. The interests of justice did not require separate hearings because appropriate jury directions could address the different counts and any risk of prejudice.

Court Disposition

Application refused; Notice of Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application by the Accused Karimi to sever Counts 1, 9, 10 and 11 is refused.' 'Notice of Motion dismissed.']