Regina v Duncan and Perre [2004] NSWCCA 431

Regina v Duncan and Perre [2004] NSWCCA 431

Appropriate directions were given at trial regarding identification evidence, and failure to object to visual identification evidence by Siljanoski did not give rise to miscarriage; sentencing for the s 33 offence was excessive and failed to give sufficient weight to youth, immaturity, and rehabilitation of appellants; appeals against conviction dismissed, but appeals against sentence for the s 33 offence allowed, resulting in reduced sentences with adjusted non-parole periods.

Parties
Appellant: Adam John Perre; Appellant: Paul Duncan; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence for s 33 offence allowed; sentences for s 33 offence quashed and new sentences imposed.
Legal Topics
Grievous Bodily Harm, Affray, Visual Identification Evidence, Sentencing, Appeal, Joint Criminal Enterprise
Criminal Law Grievous Bodily Harm Affray Visual Identification Evidence Sentencing Appeal Joint Criminal Enterprise

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 5 Authorities cited 62 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adam John Perre

Appellant

Paul Duncan

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether visual identification evidence was properly admitted under Evidence Act 1995 s 114
  2. 2 Whether cross-examination of witness Siljanoski was allowable under Evidence Act 1995 s 38
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred regarding the admissibility of evidence under Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 s 13

Ratio Decidendi

Appropriate directions were given at trial regarding identification evidence, and failure to object to visual identification evidence by Siljanoski did not give rise to miscarriage; sentencing for the s 33 offence was excessive and failed to give sufficient weight to youth, immaturity, and rehabilitation of appellants; appeals against conviction dismissed, but appeals against sentence for the s 33 offence allowed, resulting in reduced sentences with adjusted non-parole periods.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence for s 33 offence allowed; sentences for s 33 offence quashed and new sentences imposed.

Orders

  • Perre: Appeal against convictions dismissed
  • Perre: Leave to appeal against sentence granted, confined to s 33 offence