Vacic v R [2011] NSWCCA 159

Vacic v R [2011] NSWCCA 159

The evidence of the appellant's financial affairs and property purchases from 2003/2004 to 2007 was relevant and admissible as circumstantial evidence rebutting the defence of duress, and there was no error in the jury directions or miscarriage of justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['duress' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'cultivation of Prohibited Plants' 'supply of Prohibited Drugs']
['criminal Law'] ['duress' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'cultivation of Prohibited Plants' 'supply of Prohibited Drugs']

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 evidence relating to the appellant's financial affairs and property purchases was admissible to rebut the defence of duress" 'Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury regarding the use of financial evidence' 'Whether special directions were required relating to evidence on tendency or coincidence' 'Whether there was a miscarriage of justice']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of the appellant's financial affairs and property purchases from 2003/2004 to 2007 was relevant and admissible as circumstantial evidence rebutting the defence of duress, and there was no error in the jury directions or miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • []