R v Warwick (No.25) [2018] NSWSC 742

R v Warwick (No.25) [2018] NSWSC 742

The accused failed to demonstrate that the interests of justice required revisiting the prior rulings on tendency and coincidence evidence, or to show that substantial new evidence warranted reconsideration of severance. The methodology of ruling on admissibility via notices and case statements was proper under the Evidence Act 1995. Therefore, the pre-trial orders remain binding and both motions by the accused were dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Motions (severance and Evidentiary Rulings)
Outcome
Both Notices of Motion by accused dismissed; prior rulings on admissibility and severance stand.
Legal Topics
['tendency and Coincidence Evidence' 'severance of Indictment' 'pre Trial Procedural Orders']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['tendency and Coincidence Evidence' 'severance of Indictment' 'pre Trial Procedural Orders']

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 / Pre Trial Motions (severance and Evidentiary Rulings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the notices of motion by the accused for separate trials (severance) and to adduce further evidence should be granted' 'Whether prior evidentiary rulings on tendency and coincidence evidence should be revisited under s 130A of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986' 'Whether motions should require the Crown to call identified witnesses pre-trial to test probative value of tendency/coincidence evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

The accused failed to demonstrate that the interests of justice required revisiting the prior rulings on tendency and coincidence evidence, or to show that substantial new evidence warranted reconsideration of severance. The methodology of ruling on admissibility via notices and case statements was proper under the Evidence Act 1995. Therefore, the pre-trial orders remain binding and both motions by the accused were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Both Notices of Motion by accused dismissed; prior rulings on admissibility and severance stand.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the Notice of Motion filed by the Accused on 8 February 2018.' 'Dismiss the Notice of Motion filed by the Accused on 8 May 2018.']