R v Blanchette [2001] NSWCCA 446

R v Blanchette [2001] NSWCCA 446

Although the Crown conceded that the conviction appeals should be allowed, acquittals were not warranted. The Crown's proposed second-trial case was not a contradictory new case: proof that the money found on Benjamin Blanchette was Mr Hampsey's would add to, but was not essential to, a case capable of being made out by the eyewitness and police evidence. The evidence adduced at trial could not be said to be insufficient to justify conviction if the trial had been properly conducted and the judge had properly directed himself. Given the seriousness and prevalence of the offences, the non-complex nature of the first trial, the strength of the Crown case, and the need for the fresh evidence...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions and Sentences in the District Court After a Trial Without Jury
Outcome
The conviction appeals were allowed, the convictions were quashed, the Crown appeal against sentence was dismissed, and a new trial of both appellants was ordered.
Legal Topics
['robbery in Company' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'new Trial' 'acquittal' 'identification Evidence' 'unsafe and Unsatisfactory Verdict' 'judge Alone Trial Reasons']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['robbery in Company' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'new Trial' 'acquittal' 'identification Evidence' 'unsafe and Unsatisfactory Verdict' 'judge Alone Trial Reasons']

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 Against Conviction and Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions and Sentences in the District Court After a Trial Without Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the convictions should be quashed in light of the Crown concessions that several grounds of appeal were made out.' 'Whether acquittals should be entered or new trials ordered after the convictions were quashed.' 'Whether the Crown proposed to make a new case at a second trial that had not been made at the first trial.' 'Whether the evidence at trial was insufficient to justify conviction if the trial judge had complied with procedural requirements and properly directed himself.' 'Whether fresh evidence concerning the wallet found by Mr McGinness required acquittals rather than a new trial.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Crown conceded that the conviction appeals should be allowed, acquittals were not warranted. The Crown's proposed second-trial case was not a contradictory new case: proof that the money found on Benjamin Blanchette was Mr Hampsey's would add to, but was not essential to, a case capable of being made out by the eyewitness and police evidence. The evidence adduced at trial could not be said to be insufficient to justify conviction if the trial had been properly conducted and the judge had properly directed himself. Given the seriousness and prevalence of the offences, the non-complex nature of the first trial, the strength of the Crown case, and the need for the fresh evidence...

Court Disposition

The conviction appeals were allowed, the convictions were quashed, the Crown appeal against sentence was dismissed, and a new trial of both appellants was ordered.

Orders

  • ['The appeal of Benjamin Ralph Blanchette is allowed and his convictions are quashed.' 'The appeal of Christian Joshua Blanchette is allowed and his convictions are quashed.' 'The appeal of the Crown is dismissed.' 'A new trial of Benjamin Ralph Blanchette and Christian Joshua Blanchette is ordered.']