R v DH [2000] NSWCCA 360

R v DH [2000] NSWCCA 360

The appeal against conviction failed because, in the context of a short trial focused principally on credibility, with counsel expressly content that the judge not summarise the evidence, the trial judge was entitled under s 405AA and s 99 not to give a full factual summary and adequately related the issues to the offences. No duplicity or miscarriage was shown because the Crown case on counts 1 and 4 was, in substance, anal intercourse. The directions on relationship evidence, complaint evidence and corroboration were adequate, any imperfections were not shown to have caused a miscarriage, and rule 4 applied because no relevant objections were taken at trial. The verdicts were open on...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment of the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal on Appeal From District Court Convictions After Jury Trial
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sexual Assault' 'homosexual Intercourse With a Male Person Above 10 and Under 18' 'jury Directions' 'failure to Sum Up Facts' 'duplicity' 'relationship Evidence' 'complaint Evidence' 'delay in Complaint' 'corroboration Warning' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'rule 4 Criminal Appeal Rules']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['sexual Assault' 'homosexual Intercourse With a Male Person Above 10 and Under 18' 'jury Directions' 'failure to Sum Up Facts' 'duplicity' 'relationship Evidence' 'complaint Evidence' 'delay in Complaint' 'corroboration Warning' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'rule 4 Criminal Appeal Rules']

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 / Judgment of the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal on Appeal From District Court Convictions After Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury about the use of evidence of sexual conduct other than that charged.' 'Whether the trial judge failed adequately to direct the jury about delay in complaint.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in suggesting that evidence of Sue McGrory might corroborate peripheral matters.' 'Whether the verdicts were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.' 'Whether the trial judge failed to sum up the evidence and relate the elements of the offences to the facts, and whether counts 1 and 4 were left to the jury in a duplicitous way.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction failed because, in the context of a short trial focused principally on credibility, with counsel expressly content that the judge not summarise the evidence, the trial judge was entitled under s 405AA and s 99 not to give a full factual summary and adequately related the issues to the offences. No duplicity or miscarriage was shown because the Crown case on counts 1 and 4 was, in substance, anal intercourse. The directions on relationship evidence, complaint evidence and corroboration were adequate, any imperfections were not shown to have caused a miscarriage, and rule 4 applied because no relevant objections were taken at trial. The verdicts were open on...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed.']