R v Afu; R v Caleo (No 9) [2018] NSWSC 188

R v Afu; R v Caleo (No 9) [2018] NSWSC 188

The application for a separate trial was refused because it was based on speculation regarding whether an alternative defence theory would be pursued or credible, and whether any additional prejudice to Mr Caleo would arise. No positive injustice warranting a separate trial was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Separate Trial
Outcome
Application for separate trial refused
Legal Topics
['separate Trials' 'prejudice to Accused' 'speculative Defence Theories']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['separate Trials' 'prejudice to Accused' 'speculative Defence Theories']

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 / Application for Separate Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the accused, Mark Caleo, should be granted a separate trial from co-accused Alani Afu based on the possibility of a new defence theory being pursued by Afu's representatives and potential prejudice caused to Caleo."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a separate trial was refused because it was based on speculation regarding whether an alternative defence theory would be pursued or credible, and whether any additional prejudice to Mr Caleo would arise. No positive injustice warranting a separate trial was established.

Court Disposition

Application for separate trial refused

Orders

  • ['Application for separate trial refused']