R v Shipsey [2018] NSWLC 4

R v Shipsey [2018] NSWLC 4

Leave was refused because the facts had been tendered as agreed facts after negotiations when the defendant was represented by counsel, the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) did not apply absent a direction under s 4(2), the defendant had long been aware of the factual issues and did not raise a dispute in a timely way, the late application would undermine finality and the integrity of the agreed facts process, and the defendant gave no evidence to support either unfairness in the agreement process or the assertion that the cannabis weights were significantly less than stated. The defendant therefore failed to discharge the onus for leave and was bound by what occurred when the guilty plea was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings Concerning Charges of Supplying Prohibited Drug Cannabis; Application for Leave to Dispute Agreed Facts / Ex Tempore Ruling Before Sentence After Guilty Plea and Form 1 Admission
Outcome
Leave to dispute agreed facts is refused; the matter will proceed to sentence.
Legal Topics
['leave to Dispute Agreed Facts' 'plea Bargain' 'guilty Plea' 'form 1' 'disputed Facts Hearing' 'evidence Act Applicability in Sentencing' 'procedural Fairness' 'finality of Proceedings' 'onus on Party Seeking Leave']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence' 'sentencing'] ['leave to Dispute Agreed Facts' 'plea Bargain' 'guilty Plea' 'form 1' 'disputed Facts Hearing' 'evidence Act Applicability in Sentencing' 'procedural Fairness' 'finality of Proceedings' 'onus on Party Seeking Leave']

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 Proceedings Concerning Charges of Supplying Prohibited Drug Cannabis; Application for Leave to Dispute Agreed Facts / Ex Tempore Ruling Before Sentence After Guilty Plea and Form 1 Admission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant should be granted leave to dispute facts that had been tendered and accepted as agreed facts after a guilty plea and Form 1 admission.' 'Whether the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), including ss 191 and 192, applied to the sentencing proceeding without a direction under s 4(2).' 'Whether the interests of justice, procedural fairness, and the late assertion that the drug weights were substantially less justified a disputed facts hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the facts had been tendered as agreed facts after negotiations when the defendant was represented by counsel, the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) did not apply absent a direction under s 4(2), the defendant had long been aware of the factual issues and did not raise a dispute in a timely way, the late application would undermine finality and the integrity of the agreed facts process, and the defendant gave no evidence to support either unfairness in the agreement process or the assertion that the cannabis weights were significantly less than stated. The defendant therefore failed to discharge the onus for leave and was bound by what occurred when the guilty plea was...

Court Disposition

Leave to dispute agreed facts is refused; the matter will proceed to sentence.

Orders

  • ['Leave is refused.' 'The matter will proceed to sentence.']