R (Cth) v Cooper [2019] NSWSC 1209
The Crown's circumstantial evidence regarding the cash in the accused's possession, when taken as a whole, is capable of supporting an inference that it was the proceeds of crime. There was therefore evidence upon which the accused could be convicted, and a directed verdict of acquittal was not available.
- Parties
- Prosecution: Regina (Crown); Accused: Jonathan Paul Cooper
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 September 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Application for Directed Verdict at Close of Crown Case
- Outcome
- application for directed verdict refused
- Legal Topics
- Conspiracy to Import a Border Controlled Drug, Proceeds of Crime, Directed Verdict, Circumstantial Evidence, Sufficiency of Proof
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina (Crown)
Prosecution
Jonathan Paul Cooper
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Directed Verdict at Close of Crown Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is sufficient evidence for the jury to infer that cash in the accused's possession was the proceeds of crime
- 2 Whether a directed verdict should be granted where the prosecution case is circumstantial
Ratio Decidendi
The Crown's circumstantial evidence regarding the cash in the accused's possession, when taken as a whole, is capable of supporting an inference that it was the proceeds of crime. There was therefore evidence upon which the accused could be convicted, and a directed verdict of acquittal was not available.
Court Disposition
application for directed verdict refused
Orders
- The application for a directed verdict with respect to count 3 is refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment