Baghdadi v R (No 2) [2012] NSWCCA 77

Baghdadi v R (No 2) [2012] NSWCCA 77

The events of the carjacking and the robberies were not substantially and relevantly similar for s 98 to apply, so the evidence was not admissible on the asserted coincidence basis, and in any event, the evidence was insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Reconsideration Following Earlier Appeal Decision
Outcome
Acquittal entered on each charge; prior new trial orders revoked
Legal Topics
['appeal' 'reconsideration' 'coincidence Evidence' 'acquittal']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['appeal' 'reconsideration' 'coincidence Evidence' 'acquittal']

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 Appeal / Application for Reconsideration Following Earlier Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 applied to evidence of carjacking in relation to charges of robbery' "Whether the events were 'related events' under s 98(2) of the Evidence Act" 'Whether evidence was sufficient to sustain a guilty verdict beyond reasonable doubt']

Ratio Decidendi

The events of the carjacking and the robberies were not substantially and relevantly similar for s 98 to apply, so the evidence was not admissible on the asserted coincidence basis, and in any event, the evidence was insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Acquittal entered on each charge; prior new trial orders revoked

Orders

  • ['Set aside Orders 5 and 6 made by the Court in this matter on 26 October 2011.' 'Enter a verdict of acquittal on each charge.']