Ritchie v R [2017] NSWCCA 21

Ritchie v R [2017] NSWCCA 21

The conviction was quashed because the Applicant had consistently maintained that the five tablets were for his own use, his former solicitor advised him imprudently and inappropriately that he had no option but to plead guilty to commercial supply because of the quantity, the plea was not attributable to consciousness of guilt, and the evidence revealed a real question concerning guilt. In those circumstances, a miscarriage of justice would occur if the Applicant were not permitted to withdraw the plea, and the proper order was a new trial rather than an acquittal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal From the District Court of New South Wales Following Plea of Guilty; Appeal Allowed
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'withdrawal of Guilty Plea' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'deemed Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'inappropriate Legal Advice']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'drug Offences'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'withdrawal of Guilty Plea' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'deemed Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'inappropriate Legal Advice']

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 Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal From the District Court of New South Wales Following Plea of Guilty; Appeal Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a miscarriage of justice would occur if the Applicant were not permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty.' 'Whether the advice given to the Applicant to plead guilty to commercial supply was imprudent and inappropriate.' "Whether the Applicant's plea was attributable to a consciousness of guilt." "Whether the material before the Court showed a real question concerning the Applicant's guilt." 'Whether the appropriate disposition was an acquittal or a new trial.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was quashed because the Applicant had consistently maintained that the five tablets were for his own use, his former solicitor advised him imprudently and inappropriately that he had no option but to plead guilty to commercial supply because of the quantity, the plea was not attributable to consciousness of guilt, and the evidence revealed a real question concerning guilt. In those circumstances, a miscarriage of justice would occur if the Applicant were not permitted to withdraw the plea, and the proper order was a new trial rather than an acquittal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed; new trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed and conviction and sentence quashed.' 'New trial ordered.' 'Matter remitted to the District Court to be dealt with in accordance with the procedures of that Court.' 'Conditional bail granted by Johnson J acting as a Judge of the Supreme Court on a basis agreed by the Applicant and the Crown.']