Vickers v R [2006] NSWCCA 60

Vickers v R [2006] NSWCCA 60

Although certain statements in the evidence were inadmissible as second-hand hearsay, their admission did not result in a substantial miscarriage of justice given the strength of the admissible evidence against the appellant and adequate directions to the jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
['hearsay' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'directions to Jury' 'criminal Appeal Rules' 'criminal Procedure Act']
['criminal Law' 'evidence Law'] ['hearsay' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'directions to Jury' 'criminal Appeal Rules' 'criminal Procedure Act']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in admitting certain hearsay statements under s65 of the Evidence Act 1995 and s289 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986' 'Whether a miscarriage of justice was occasioned by failure to warn jury of the danger of relying on certain parts of evidence' 'Whether leave was required under rule 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules to raise certain grounds of appeal']

Ratio Decidendi

Although certain statements in the evidence were inadmissible as second-hand hearsay, their admission did not result in a substantial miscarriage of justice given the strength of the admissible evidence against the appellant and adequate directions to the jury.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed

Orders

  • []