R v Bartuccio [2017] NSWDC 286

R v Bartuccio [2017] NSWDC 286

Although the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was not authorised by a licence or permit and that he occupied the premises where the firearm was located for the purposes of s 4A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW), the accused established on the balance of probabilities under s 4A(1)(c) that he was not in possession of the firearm. The firearm belonged to his father, was said to have been stored by the father among his own property for many years, the accused was living full-time with his wife at West Hoxton by 8 December 2016, others had access to the relevant areas, and the evidence did not establish that the accused intentionally controlled the firearm.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial by Judge Alone for Possessing a Firearm Without a Licence or Permit Contrary to S 7 A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (nsw) / Verdict After Judge Alone Trial
Outcome
I find the offence not proved and the accused not guilty
Legal Topics
['possess Firearm Without Permit' 'extended Statutory Definition of Possession' 'occupation of Premises' 'reverse Onus Defence' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'judge Alone Trial Directions']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'firearms Regulation'] ['possess Firearm Without Permit' 'extended Statutory Definition of Possession' 'occupation of Premises' 'reverse Onus Defence' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'judge Alone Trial Directions']

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 Trial by Judge Alone for Possessing a Firearm Without a Licence or Permit Contrary to S 7 A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (nsw) / Verdict After Judge Alone Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused possessed the firearm found at 160 Devonshire Road, Rossmore on 8 December 2016.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was not authorised by a licence or permit to possess the firearm.' 'Whether the Crown proved that the firearm was on premises owned, leased or occupied by, or in the care, control or management of, the accused so as to engage s 4A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW).' 'Whether the accused established on the balance of probabilities that he did not know and could not reasonably be expected to have known that the firearm was on the premises under s 4A(1)(b) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW).' 'Whether the accused established on the balance of probabilities that he was not in possession of the firearm under s 4A(1)(c) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was not authorised by a licence or permit and that he occupied the premises where the firearm was located for the purposes of s 4A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW), the accused established on the balance of probabilities under s 4A(1)(c) that he was not in possession of the firearm. The firearm belonged to his father, was said to have been stored by the father among his own property for many years, the accused was living full-time with his wife at West Hoxton by 8 December 2016, others had access to the relevant areas, and the evidence did not establish that the accused intentionally controlled the firearm.

Court Disposition

I find the offence not proved and the accused not guilty

Orders

  • ['The accused is found not guilty.']