Miller v R (No 2) [2016] NSWCCA 158

Miller v R (No 2) [2016] NSWCCA 158

r 50C of the Criminal Appeal Rules does not permit re-agitation of unsuccessful appeals or reconsideration of issues already determined. It is of limited application and may be used only to correct slips or where a ground was overlooked. UCPR r 36.16 does not apply in criminal appeals. No misapprehension of law or error warranting reopening was established; the applicant's submissions amounted to an attempt to re-argue the prior appeal, which is impermissible.

Parties
Applicant: Damon Charles Miller; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / R 50 C Application to Set Aside/vary Appeal Order
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Appeals, Procedural Finality, Voice Identification Evidence, Visual Identification Evidence, Handwriting Evidence, Reopening Under R 50 C, Judicial Recusal, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Appeals Procedural Finality Voice Identification Evidence Visual Identification Evidence Handwriting Evidence Reopening Under R 50 C Judicial Recusal +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 35 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Damon Charles Miller

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / R 50 C Application to Set Aside/vary Appeal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether r 50C of the Criminal Appeal Rules permits re-agitation of issues determined in appeal judgment
  2. 2 Whether errors of fact or law require reopening under r 50C
  3. 3 Whether UCPR r 36.16 applies to criminal appeals

Ratio Decidendi

r 50C of the Criminal Appeal Rules does not permit re-agitation of unsuccessful appeals or reconsideration of issues already determined. It is of limited application and may be used only to correct slips or where a ground was overlooked. UCPR r 36.16 does not apply in criminal appeals. No misapprehension of law or error warranting reopening was established; the applicant's submissions amounted to an attempt to re-argue the prior appeal, which is impermissible.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed.

Orders

  • Notice of motion dismissed.
  • Applications for adjournment and recusal refused.