R v Basanovic and ors (No. 1) [2015] NSWSC 1033

R v Basanovic and ors (No. 1) [2015] NSWSC 1033

The application was refused because, even assuming the Crown case against Brian Brown was weaker than the case against the co-accused, he did not identify evidence to be led that was highly prejudicial to him and inadmissible against him. The possibility that a co-accused might give evidence implicating him was speculative and, if given, would not be inadmissible against him. The judge was not satisfied that a joint trial would prejudice or embarrass him in his defence or that any other reason made a separate trial desirable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding on Indictment for Murder and Causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent / Application by Brian Brown on the First Day Fixed for Trial for a Separate Trial From the Co Accused
Outcome
Application for a separate trial refused.
Legal Topics
['separate Trial' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'murder' 'causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['separate Trial' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'murder' 'causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence']

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 for Murder and Causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent / Application by Brian Brown on the First Day Fixed for Trial for a Separate Trial From the Co Accused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Brian Brown should be tried separately from Michael Basanovic and Wade Basanovic on the indicted counts.' 'Whether a joint trial would prejudice or embarrass Brian Brown in his defence under s 21 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicant identified highly prejudicial evidence admissible against co-accused but inadmissible against him that would create a real risk of positive injustice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because, even assuming the Crown case against Brian Brown was weaker than the case against the co-accused, he did not identify evidence to be led that was highly prejudicial to him and inadmissible against him. The possibility that a co-accused might give evidence implicating him was speculative and, if given, would not be inadmissible against him. The judge was not satisfied that a joint trial would prejudice or embarrass him in his defence or that any other reason made a separate trial desirable.

Court Disposition

Application for a separate trial refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for a separate trial was refused.']