AC v R [2016] NSWCCA 21
The trial judge correctly permitted and confined the use of tendency evidence to two categories, and gave clear jury directions; any procedural shortcomings or lack of specificity did not cause a miscarriage of justice, particularly as evidence of the acts in question was unopposed and the jury's verdicts show no improper use. The guilty verdicts on the relevant counts were open to the jury based on the evidence.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 February 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Leave to Appeal and Merits
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['tendency Evidence' 'uncharged Acts' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'assault Offences' 'unreasonable Verdicts']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Leave to Appeal and Merits
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether tendency evidence was admissible and of significant probative value' 'Whether probative value of tendency evidence outweighed prejudicial effect' 'Whether inconsistent and/or unreasonable verdicts required intervention' 'Whether count 10 was established beyond reasonable doubt']
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge correctly permitted and confined the use of tendency evidence to two categories, and gave clear jury directions; any procedural shortcomings or lack of specificity did not cause a miscarriage of justice, particularly as evidence of the acts in question was unopposed and the jury's verdicts show no improper use. The guilty verdicts on the relevant counts were open to the jury based on the evidence.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment