Dent v R [2017] NSWCCA 166

Dent v R [2017] NSWCCA 166

Neither the Crown's questioning nor its address raised tendency evidence as prohibited under s 97; the cross-examination was contextually relevant and fully traversed by the appellant. No miscarriage of justice arose. Regarding the absence of a direction that no adverse inference be drawn from silence in police interview, no adverse use was made of silence at trial, the appellant gave evidence, and the omission did not constitute a fundamental miscarriage. Leave to argue this ground is refused under r 4.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal – Conviction Appeal Against Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on second ground (regarding jury direction on silence) refused
Legal Topics
['conviction Appeal' 'felony Murder' 'robbery in Company Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm' 'tendency Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice']
['criminal Law'] ['conviction Appeal' 'felony Murder' 'robbery in Company Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm' 'tendency Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice']

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 / Court of Criminal Appeal – Conviction Appeal Against Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Crown cross-examination and address raised prohibited tendency issues resulting in miscarriage of justice' "Whether trial judge should have directed the jury that no adverse inference could be drawn from the accused's refusal to be interviewed by police"]

Ratio Decidendi

Neither the Crown's questioning nor its address raised tendency evidence as prohibited under s 97; the cross-examination was contextually relevant and fully traversed by the appellant. No miscarriage of justice arose. Regarding the absence of a direction that no adverse inference be drawn from silence in police interview, no adverse use was made of silence at trial, the appellant gave evidence, and the omission did not constitute a fundamental miscarriage. Leave to argue this ground is refused under r 4.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on second ground (regarding jury direction on silence) refused

Orders

  • ['Ground of Appeal 1 is dismissed.' 'Leave to rely upon Ground of Appeal 2, pursuant to r 4 of the Court of Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW) is refused.']