LEE v R [2009] NSWCCA 259

LEE v R [2009] NSWCCA 259

The trial judge's grant of leave to the Crown to cross-examine Leanne Montgomery was proper under s 38 of the Evidence Act, his explanation to the jury regarding the evidence being 'unfavourable' did not constitute error, and no warning was required regarding cross-examined evidence. No error was demonstrated that would warrant allowing any ground of appeal.

Parties
Applicant: Christopher Roy LEE; Respondent/crown: REGINA
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Evidence, Leave to Cross Examine, Directions to Jury
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Leave to Cross Examine Directions to Jury

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Roy LEE

Applicant

REGINA

Respondent/crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in granting leave to the Crown to cross-examine Leanne Montgomery
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in informing the jury that evidence was 'unfavourable'
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to give a required warning to the jury regarding leave to cross-examine

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's grant of leave to the Crown to cross-examine Leanne Montgomery was proper under s 38 of the Evidence Act, his explanation to the jury regarding the evidence being 'unfavourable' did not constitute error, and no warning was required regarding cross-examined evidence. No error was demonstrated that would warrant allowing any ground of appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Extension of time for lodgement of appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed